For the longest time, poker tournaments paid about 10% of the sphere. And in fact, the earliest WSOP events were winner-take-all, if memory serves. But there has been a general sense that the highest small handful of individuals should take home the entire money.
As time has progressed, most people within the business have come to believe that paying out more of the sector is healthier. That is, increasing the selection of players who get something back is preferable to putting an additional bonus on top of the already staggering size of the prizes on the top.
To give an example, suppose first prize on the PokerStars Caribbean Adventure (PCA) was going to be $1.5 million. But suppose that in place of paying that guy/gal $1.5 million, we paid her or him $1.2 million and paid out 15 more people on the very bottom of the money ladder $20k each? I claim that that move can be +EV for the entire game and industry. Yes, in some senses, we'd be costing our winner $300k, that is serious money. But let's be real - $1.2 million is huge life-changing money it doesn't matter what. Our winner goes to have an extremely hello. But we've just made 15 more people have an excellent day too.
And the reality of the problem is that while we speak about the huge prizes up top, and everyone talks about not desirous to min-cash, there are two indisputable facts that lead me to believe that that isn't the entire story.
First, take a look at all of the final table deals. If everybody really wanted that just about unimaginably large first prize, then deals wouldn't happen. But in point of fact, they happen just about all the time. Regardless of whether it's nervous amateurs fearful of playing for enormous sums, or seasoned pros looking to reduce the variance, there appears to be a universal appetite for deal-making.
And let's discuss the bubble. For the entire individuals who mentioned not desirous to min-cash, take a look at the wave of "chip and a chair" behaviour because the bubble approaches. Those individuals are not making ICM-optimal decisions to maximise their chances for a last table; they're doing whatever it's going to take to get to the money. The very smallest minimum payoff. My point is that this: whatever people's plans and dreams are at first of a tournament, for many folks, there comes some degree where locking up some money presently is preferable to the potential for more cash later. Call it the "Bird within the hand" theory.
So we studied on that for some time after which somebody said, "Well, what if we paid 50% of the sector"? "DO NOT BE silly, you cannot pay 50% of the sphere". Well, in point of fact, you'll. When we worked out the details, here is what we came up with:
When we get all the way down to half the field, we are going to return the unique buy-in to all remaining players. So suppose it is a $1000+$100 event with 80 runners. When 40 players are left, we walk around and drop $1100 in cash (or chips) in front of every of the remainder 40 players. The cash that's left is sent in an 8% payout structure (not too terribly different than how regular tournaments used to receives a commission out within the old days). So there are really two bubbles: at 50% of the sphere and eight% of the sphere. Being the selling geniuses we are, we borrowed and adapted the name of a classic American bubble gum and called these tournaments "Double Bubble".
Obviously, these tournaments aren't going to go back massive prizes on the top - if you wish to opt for the massive brass ring, join one among our regular tournaments. But when you wish to have some good fun with nominally a 50% chance of having your money back, and the risk to still win some nice prizes deep in, maybe Double Bubbles are only the article for you.We're going to offer them a test-drive on the PCA, that is the easiest place for a light-hearted entertainment-centric event similar to Double Bubbles are. We expect they'll be fun and offer players an opportunity to check out something different. Can we expect Double Bubbles to revolutionize the poker tournament scene? Not likely, but there is no harm here -we'll run a couple of and, as always, see what the players let us know with their feet.
So, do you think that you'll outlast just half the sector in a poker tournament? If so, in a Double Bubble, you're going to get your buy-in back and can be freerolling for the intense money. Search for Double Bubbles at a PCA near you in early 2015.
Lee Jones is the top of Poker Communications at PokerStars. He first joined the corporate in 2003 and have been occupied with the pro poker industry for over 25 years. You'll be able to read his occasional tweets at @leehjones.
Read More... [Source: PokerStarsBlog.com :: PokerStars Caribbean Adventure]
No comments:
Post a Comment