Poll on Capped Prizepools

NickyOD

Question.

Would you prefer to pay for a tournament that charges a registration fee which is the only money taken by the organisers, and the prizpool increases in relation to the number of players that enter?

OR

A capped tournament that charges a smaller reg. The prizepool will not increase as players buy back only increase the amount in non-reg fees taken by the organisers.

henbane

OR

Would you prefer if Nicky stopped flogging this dead horse in a semi-literate manner?

NickyOD

henbane wrote:

OR

Would you prefer if Nicky stopped flogging this dead horse in a semi-literate manner?

What was semi-literate about my post?

henbane

atari jaguar!

DeVore

Its a valid point though, I have gotten to the stage where I dont WANT to enter a tournie where the prize is a **GUARUNTEED €3000!!!** cos I just know I'll end up playing through 160 people for 1400 top prize.

DeV.

JuliusFranco

somebody voted YES :eek:

NickyOD

Fintan. Do you have any comments on the results so far on the poll?

bmc

NickyOD wrote:

Fintan. Do you have any comments on the results so far on the poll?

Yaaaaaawn! I would also like to cast my vote for "flogging dead horse".

Phil_321

Hey Nicky why don't you start your own tournaments where you put all the money you make back into the prize pool. I'm sure the players would love that.

bohsman

I voted yes as I presumed everyone else would aswell, the stupider the poll the stupider my vote

Running Bing

Of course everyone gonna vote no. you have to remember though the organizers are providing a service and expect to be paid. theres no law set in stone that says tournaments should not be capped organisers are free to make theie own rules and if you dont like it just dont play.

you might as well post a poll "who likes paying tax". nobody does but its something we all have to do.

DeVore

Er, no we dont. We can choose to play in tournaments that dont cap their prize pool and pocket a load of dosh, stripping the game of any value for the players.

If I am given a choice between a capped prizepool and a non-capped one, I'll NEVER EVER take the capped prizepool. In fact, a choice between capped and NO GAME AT ALL I'll stay at home or go to the Fitz. What angers me greatly is when I dont know that the tournie I'm travelling to and paying expenses to attend is a hookey game thats not going to pay out half what it takes in. That makes me mad. Informed players make informed choices. Not clearly informing the players is aking to THEFT in my book and should be outlawed. Thats why I've started the drive for the Players Charter, to protect the players and try to put a baseline on how badly ripped off we can be...


DeV.

Jaden

When is your tourament on Nicky?

NickyOD

Jaden wrote:

When is your tourament on Nicky?

What's a tourament?

azzeretti

I personally don't understand why some people have problems with this. Before entering the tourney in question you should be well aware that this is (or isn't) the case i.e. the prize pool will be capped or not. The very fact that a person enters should suggest they agree with the format of that particular event.
Let’s be honest here, everybody involved in poker, from home gamers, dealers, players, organisers, projectionist etc. have one thing on their mind - TO MAKE MONEY! Everyone realises this when they enter, they just wanna win. I don't for one second think that an organiser is putting on an event to raise the profile of Irish poker, but that is irrelevant, he is trying to make money and so am I, as long as the payout is advertised prior to the event then I believe nobody should have any basis for argument, you either play or you don't.
BTW, this subject has been hammered already in another, very long going, thread. Maybe its time to consider putting it to rest eh?

NickyOD

azzeretti wrote:

I personally don't understand why some people have problems with this. Before entering the tourney in question you should be well aware that this is (or isn't) the case i.e. the prize pool will be capped or not. The very fact that a person enters should suggest they agree with the format of that particular event.

The tournament advertised the prizepools as "guaranteed" not capped. These are two different thing entirely, so you cannot say that before entering the event ithe payout structure is completely clear. The payouts may be announce when you get there, but I'd be pretty pissed if I travelled to a guarantted prizepool event only to find the prizepool doesn't go over that amount when the amount in non reg fees payed out by players reaches a certain level. .[/QUOTE]

azzeretti wrote:

Let’s be honest here, everybody involved in poker, from home gamers, dealers, players, organisers, projectionist etc. have one thing on their mind - TO MAKE MONEY! Everyone realises this when they enter, they just wanna win. I don't for one second think that an organiser is putting on an event to raise the profile of Irish poker, but that is irrelevant, he is trying to make money and so am I, as long as the payout is advertised prior to the event then I believe nobody should have any basis for argument, you either play or you don't.

No one ever disputed the fact that organisers should make money. The discussion is about whether or not players are getting value for their money. If you are willing pay a 10% reg fee only to find that 20-30% of money handed in by players might not be included in the prizepool then that is entirely your business. I however feel that a precedent is being set whereby organisers feel thay can take whatever amount they like from a prizepool and ignore the whole point of having a reg fee in the first place. If as a player you don't have a problem with this then you are obviously only playing poker for entertainment value rather than to make money.

azzeretti wrote:

BTW, this subject has been hammered already in another, very long going, thread. Maybe its time to consider putting it to rest eh?

Fintan has already said his next set of events will only take money from players in form of a reg fee, so lets just wait and see.

azzeretti

Nicky, I accept your points, but I think you are being a bit pedantic here. If a tourney says $5000 guaranteed then, personally (and that’s the only person I can speak for) I don't have a problem as long as the prize fund is €5000. I go to this tournament knowing that, at the very least, I will be in for a cut of €5000. The rebuys might, in some tournaments, increase this value, but this is dynamic and dependant on the amount of players rebuying etc.....
If nobody rebuys (highly unlikely, I know) then the fund is AT LEAST €5000. I don't really care if the promoter/organiser rakes a bit more, I am still entering with the possibility of 5K.
However (after all that), I can plainly see how someone might be pi$$ed off when they see a guaranteed 5k, enter, see another 3K in rebuys and notice no difference in the payout. BUT, this doesn't bother me. Either way, like you said, this is slightly off your original post. I don't think anyone will ever prefer capping a prize pool (except the organiser) but I don't really mind showing up to one of these tournaments anyway.

DapperGent

azzeretti wrote:

However (after all that), I can plainly see how someone might be pi$$ed off when they see a guaranteed 5k, enter, see another 3K in rebuys and notice no difference in the payout. BUT, this doesn't bother me.

It should.

NickyOD

azzeretti wrote:

However (after all that), I can plainly see how someone might be pi$$ed off when they see a guaranteed 5k, enter, see another 3K in rebuys and notice no difference in the payout. BUT, this doesn't bother me. .

DapperGent wrote:

It should.

Took the worlds right out of my mouth.

azzeretti

At the risk of plunging this post into an episode on little Britain - "no, but yeah, but no, but"
It still doesn't bother me......and unless someone wants to register another subdomain as fascism.boards.ie , I think, like my original post say, that I AM entitled to this point of view, I am not trying to enforce it on other players by telling them what their views "Should" or "Shouldn't" be, this is simply what I think.
I don't want to be getting into agro with anyone over something so trivial, but I just reckon people should respect peoples views and not try to persuade them other wise.
"Yeah I know"

Jaden

NickyOD wrote:

What's a tourament?

It's like a tournament, but typed too quickly.

When is the one you're organising on? (If any?).

NickyOD

Jaden wrote:

It's like a tournament, but typed too quickly.

When is the one you're organising on? (If any?).

I'm not.

Doc Farrell

DeVore wrote:

Its a valid point though, I have gotten to the stage where I dont WANT to enter a tournie where the prize is a **GUARUNTEED €3000!!!** cos I just know I'll end up playing through 160 people for 1400 top prize.

DeV.

It's spelt GaurAnteed Tom, GaurAnteed! Oh dear God, is there no end? Won't you gauruntee me you'll spell it right! What? oh no!

Tourneque

Doc Farrell wrote:

It's spelt GaurAnteed Tom, GaurAnteed! Oh dear God, is there no end? Won't you gauruntee me you'll spell it right! What? oh no!

Now that is funny

bmc

Doc Farrell wrote:

It's spelt GaurAnteed Tom, GaurAnteed! Oh dear God, is there no end? Won't you gauruntee me you'll spell it right! What? oh no!

Hee hee... Yeah it is funny.

It's actually gUAranteed!

henbane

azzeretti wrote:

At the risk of plunging this post into an episode on little Britain - "no, but yeah, but no, but"
It still doesn't bother me......and unless someone wants to register another subdomain as fascism.boards.ie , I think, like my original post say, that I AM entitled to this point of view, I am not trying to enforce it on other players by telling them what their views "Should" or "Shouldn't" be, this is simply what I think.
I don't want to be getting into agro with anyone over something so trivial, but I just reckon people should respect peoples views and not try to persuade them other wise.
"Yeah I know"

This isn't a matter of opinion or respect. It's a matter of simple math.

Say you enter a 10 person tournament with 100% payout for 1st. Everyone pays $10 + vig and the organiser only pockets the vig. There will be $100 in the prizepool and each player (assuming similar skill levels) will have a 0.1 * $100 EV for the tournament. If the tournament organiser caps the prizepool at $50, each player will have 0.1 * $50 EV.

Obviously, the first situation is to the advantage of the player. This isn't a matter of opinion, it's fact. This is why you were told you should mind entering tournaments where the prizepool is capped.

This example can be scaled up and tweaked for rebuys and different payout structures but the basics stay the same. More players or chips (in the form of rebuys/topups) mean you have less chance of the win. If the prizepool doesn't increase accordingly, you are losing value.

You can make arguments about skill levels etc. but you still have to beat more people for an amount of money which doesn't represent the difficulty of winning the event.

You are entitled to your opinion. You can enter these events knowing that you're not getting full value for your buyin but it isn't fascism, it's fact. If you want to play these games, make an informed decision.

To Pokerevents credit, he has stopped telling people who disagree with him about the good of the game and various other wooly arguments. He is entitled to attempt to make a profit but to my mind he would be better off not guaranteeing prize funds and charging a reg which represents his true costs. That's up to himself.

I think there's life in the old nag yet