Tournament Payout Structures

Fatboydim

Due to the recent thread about the Macau Payout structure thought I'd poll boards members to see what the general feeling is about payout structures.
So you have €253.500 to distribute between 18 players.

I propose:

1 - 50k
2 - 40k
3 - 30k
4 - 25k
5 - 20k
6 - 16.5k
7 - 14k
8 - 11.5k
9 - 9K
10 - 7k
11 - 5.5k
12 - 4.25k
13 - 4.25k
14 - 3.5k
15 - 3.5k
16 - 3.5k
17 - 3k
18 - 3k

bohsman

Top 10% of the field with anyone in the money getting at least double their entry fee. Top 5 in yours is horribly flat.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

bohsman

My ideal scenario is obviously winner takes all.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

bohsman

There would obviously be loads of deals done but it would be leaving it entirely up to the players.

robinblinds

The current market probably wants flatter payouts in my opinion.

nicnicnic

stars have gone down the flatter payout route recently and I think its better allthough they pay to many. The macau payout this weekend was actually a little flatter then last. The casino organisers think the big top prize is attractive but I think its the total prize pool attracts knowledgeable players.

I think the payouts are getting flatter generally look at the weekend 4th 20k 1st 80k compare this to the IPC 1st 180k 4th 35k. but as long as the structures remain the same deals are inevitable. Who really wants to race for 40k after three+ hard days graft which in the end is what most late stage tournaments come down to.

I don't think paying more then 10% should ever be considered

TripleAce

Fatboydim wrote: »

Due to the recent thread about the Macau Payout structure thought I'd poll boards members to see what the general feeling is about payout structures.
So you have €253.500 to distribute between 18 players.

I propose:

1 - 50k
2 - 40k
3 - 30k
4 - 25k
5 - 20k
6 - 16.5k
7 - 14k
8 - 11.5k
9 - 9K
10 - 7k
11 - 5.5k
12 - 4.25k
13 - 4.25k
14 - 3.5k
15 - 3.5k
16 - 3.5k
17 - 3k
18 - 3k

I like it! God only knows how much money I lost (especially online) this year because although I made maybe 50 FT, I never managed to win one this year!!

I think with a flatter payout structure like this, players will really be pushed to play till the end and avoid making deals...again, I like it!

Fatboydim

It's not something I have sleepless nights about - In fact I think payout structures are almost always irrelevant as nearly always deals are struck. It's fine to say "No deals" if you're a sponsored pro perhaps. I think top 10% is fine. - However - I like the above structure because in theory it takes deals out of the equation - and when you look at the deal that was struck over the weekend to all intents and purposes everyone in the top four got the same sort of payout.

However - It has to be said that the bonus of the Top Heavy structure is that if you have the majority of the chips then you can strike the best deal or indeed just take top prize - after all you've deserved it.

The Tourist

robinblinds wrote: »

The current market probably wants flatter payouts in my opinion.

+1.

Surely the simple fact that final table deals are done in most, if not all, serious live tourneys proves that the players don't want these top heavy structures.

Whenever I see the payout structure these days I usually ignore the details and just calculate the average of the top 4 or 5 places. It's more realistic IMO.

At the other extreme, I was in the Fitz playing cash a couple of weeks ago, and the cash league final was on. A deal was proposed when there were (roughly, someone correct me on the details) 30 players still in! LOL, maybe they all couldn't wait to play cash games. :pac:

robinblinds

I think its about protecting the game as a whole and the players you have. If the payouts favour the top, why should a guy fork out to play in a one, two or three day tourney?

Value has to be key in current circumstances. Tourney organisers have a duty to protect their customers and provide a game that offers a reasonable chance of winning a few quid, enjoying the structure, and most importantly, giving the player every reason to turn up at the next one.

corkie123

Fatboydim wrote: »

Due to the recent thread about the Macau Payout structure thought I'd poll boards members to see what the general feeling is about payout structures.
So you have €253.500 to distribute between 18 players.

I propose:

1 - 50k
2 - 40k
3 - 30k
4 - 25k
5 - 20k
6 - 16.5k
7 - 14k
8 - 11.5k
9 - 9K
10 - 7k
11 - 5.5k
12 - 4.25k
13 - 4.25k
14 - 3.5k
15 - 3.5k
16 - 3.5k
17 - 3k
18 - 3k

len this really a better payout for all .getting to final table last week ment only 4.5k for 9th and 7th got 7k i think ask sideshow .after getting so far i think it very bad return to get only 4.5k for 9th at least with your payout u get 9k .and 5ok first is not to be snezzed at :D:D

POKERBOY

Fatboydim wrote: »

Due to the recent thread about the Macau Payout structure thought I'd poll boards members to see what the general feeling is about payout structures.
So you have €253.500 to distribute between 18 players.

I propose:

1 - 50k
2 - 40k
3 - 30k
4 - 25k
5 - 20k
6 - 16.5k
7 - 14k
8 - 11.5k
9 - 9K
10 - 7k
11 - 5.5k
12 - 4.25k
13 - 4.25k
14 - 3.5k
15 - 3.5k
16 - 3.5k
17 - 3k
18 - 3k

this is a perfect payout scale imo

TheRock

Top 10% paid is fine. But it needs to be flatter in that 10%.
If you cash you should at least get 2.5x your buyin.

The single reason I dont travel to as many events as I used to is the thought of playing for 2-3 days, cashing and only barely getting my buyin back and maybe even being at a loss by the time you take expenses into account.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

Fatboydim

I should have put winner take all up there as well.

Given the responses so far it's surprising that sats aren't more popular as they of course provide the flattest payouts. Although of course you'd have the problem of getting rid of the unwanted tickets.

30something

Don't forget though that one of the attractions drawing all the players in the first place is the thought of the chance of winning the BIG FIRST PRIZE.

If you flattten it out you might lose runners.

ditpoker

with the poll results in mind thus far, assuming 1200 players for the IPO. WOuld paying top 120, or 100 be better? and roughly what % of pay should be on final table, 50%?

bohsman

ditpoker wrote: »

with the poll results in mind thus far, assuming 1200 players for the IPO. WOuld paying top 120, or 100 be better? and roughly what % of pay should be on final table, 50%?

With poll results in mind pay everyone, $10 for 1200th etc

Doc Farrell

oh the Swiftian satire Oscar! Bravo sir!

(i prefer flatter payouts too.... hope i see a final table this year...)

pokerkingsni

Just a thought, but would it be an idea for casinos/tournament organisers to get together and draw up a standard payout structure to be used in all their tournaments. It seems that most of the big casino managers and tournament organisers know each other and help each other out with promotions and satellites. So why not meet up and draw up a payout structure?

An example would be something like:

0-14 players - 1 places paid 100%
15-24 players - 2 places paid 70% 30%
25-34 players - 3 places paid 60% 25% 15%
35-44 players - 4 places paid 50% 25% 15% 10%
etc.

This is for illustration purposes, obviously the numbers will be up to the organisers. Run these numbers right up to 2000 if neccessary.

This would mean that players would be aware of places paid and the percentage breakdown of the prize money before the tournament starts and therefore avoids any confusion or moaning from players.

Just an idea.

ditpoker

draft IPO payout structure now in http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055330858 this thread, post 151 for anyone who is interested.