Celtic Poker Tour: Quick update

Lplate

azzeretti wrote:

No, seriously. You are takin' the p!ss here, aren't you?

Nope. I wasn't there but have been told this story by 2 separate people thet were.

azzeretti

bmc wrote:

But according to your quote, he didn't get it wrong. His AQ wouldn't be in the lead if Ted had AK.

Sorry I'm a facetious one.

I know it wouldn't be behind either, like he said (unless he had AK). It is a split pot either way unless there is a 6 there.

Fathead

bmc wrote:

But according to your quote, he didn't get it wrong. His AQ wouldn't be in the lead if Ted had AK.

Sorry I'm a facetious one.

That sounds like a hand he played against ted forrest where in fact ted had AA to fill the bigger house he didn't bet it which threw daniel. i think it was on a full tilt tournament that was screened a good few weels ago, i could be way off

NickyOD

azzeretti wrote:

Below is taken from Daniel Negreanu's blog. It could be somehting like this that made the TD at Celtic Poker made such a bad decision - unless I am missing something really stupid - in which case I am sorry and please delete this reply!

Ted called the turn and the river brought another 6, for a final board 6-6-4-A-6. I checked and made it rather obvious (at least to me) that I didn’t like that card. I figured that my A-Q was probably in the lead, unless of course Ted had A-K.

A-Q against A-K on this board is a............anyone?

I think you misunderstood what he was saying. He didn't like the river because he felt he was in the lead on the turn unless his oponent had AK, so he was pissed his oponent caught up for the split pot.

azzeretti

NickyOD wrote:

I think you misunderstood what he was saying. He didn't like the river because he felt he was in the lead on the turn unless his oponent had AK, so he was pissed his oponent caught up for the split pot.

Yeah....I was taking it literally. That is, "I figured that my A-Q was probably in the lead, unless of course Ted had A-K." That his A-Q is ahead unless there was an A-K which mean he might loose. Like I opened with - Ignore it!

Fatboydim

Tackle I'm not sure why you see the need to defend these people. If you are not affiliated with them in some way then you should be appalled. They have more than covered their investment in chips and tables by now. They have staff, but only on hand to take your money. Any tournament that offers rebuys for less than the original buy in is a farce and turns the tournament into an all in bingofest. Most gamblers I know choose their bets carefully, and would walk an extra half mile to a bookie not charging 3%. Yet here you are thinking that a rake of 40% is fine. The fact that you keep coming back to defend these people would seem to suggest that you are in some way connected to them… as this kind of rake is indefensible. High rake on touring events is something a poker player outside of Cork / Belfast and Dublin have to put up with. At least with Pokerevents it’s all up front and nothing is hidden. In fact I remember going to the first event they held and questioning Fintan about the fact that the rebuys were originally not added to the prizepool. Fintan took the feedback from here and elsewhere and changed it. But no one from CPT has come on here unless it’s been in disguise as an ordinary punter. But comparing the two from what I can gather you have this:

Pokerevents – Usual buy in: €50 + €15 reg + 1 rebuy of €50 + €10 that’s 25% if you rebuy or top up. The prizepool is no longer guaranteed but 100% goes into the prizepool. The reg fees go to pay for Hotel function room hire, Dealers, Transport, Equipment, A TD who knows the rules inside out and a support staff of Assistant TD’s. So if there’s 100 players and they all rebuy or top up the prizepool is €10k – If there are 200 players the prizepool would be €20k [Assuming all top up or rebuy] In the first scenario they take €2500 in the second €5000. They are also sponsored by Boyle’s so the tables and equipment are first class. [Usually High hand and bounty prizes on the night – these do not come out of prizepool AFAIK]

CPT – Usual buy in €50 + €5 reg + several €25 rebuys or top ups. [Is there actually a limit on these – if so how do they keep score?] Prizepool guaranteed at €10k – but capped at that amount. No dealers, [until final table] A TD who doesn’t know the rules, 14 runners to take your money. Round tables, equipment, transport and venue to pay for. [Spot prizes are sponsored] Given 100 runners all doing one rebuy and one top up [though could be more] prizepool is €10k. Given 200 runners prizepool is still €10K even though there is another €10k in the pot. So in first scenario CPT make €500 and charge 5% in the second scenario they make €11k which is in fact a massive 55% rake. It has been said that some of their events have had 250 runners which would make the sums even worse a profit of €16.25K which is a 65% rake.

Now it has been said that they increased the prizepool on one occasion to 12k… But the maths still don’t add up. If CPT want to be taken seriously they will have to be more transparent. If you and other want to play for these kind of odds that’s up to yourselves… But I think Nicky is right no poker player worthy of the name would see this as positive EV.

Degag

Culchie wrote:

No, on the basis that you obviously can't work out what is good value, and what is bad value.
If your calculations are so far flawed that you can't work out that a 40% rake is bad value a few days later, and after receiving a few hints on this thread (unanimous, I might add) .... what chance have you got to make a decision on how many outs you have to draw to the nuts within a few seconds?

And if it was a 20% rake??? What difference would it make to you unless you finished in the prizes, fair enough if they increased the ammount of placing that would win money, but what if they just increased the winnings of the top ten(or whatever it is) and kept it at that. You misunderestimate me, its not exactly difficult to have a fair idea how many outs you have in a hand of poker, simply multiply the number of cards that can get you out of trouble by four and you will be close enough. The fact that i entered a tournament with a payout of only 60% is not troubling to me, i did it for a bit of craic, which i got. You seem very worried about these percentages.... i could easily say to you that you would be worried that if you bought a bar of chocolate for €1, you would be pissed off if you found out that it only cost 60 cent to make..... a point that shouldn't be taken to heart, but it probably will be.

Also i do not like my intelligence to be mocked in such a way, i may be knew to these boards, but you shouldn't be making presumptions when you don't know me.

Fatboydim

Tackle69 wrote:

simply multiply the number of cards that can get you out of trouble by four and you will be close enough.

LMAO

Tackle welcome to boards... If you are genuine then please do not be put off by this - But seriously you have a lot of learning ahead of you if that's how you work out your outs.

Duff Man Jr.

Fatboydim wrote:

LMAO

Tackle welcome to boards... If you are genuine then please do not be put off by this - But seriously you have a lot of learning ahead of you if that's how you work out your outs.

Yay i actually had 4 times the amt of outs i tought i had, i'm never lose again with these odds.

JoeyJJ

If you are a regular player, you want to extract the highest amount possible from your winnings, to cover you when you are not winning so the excessive rake is taking away money from everyone and is a rip complete rip off.

Degag

Fatboydim wrote:

LMAO

Tackle welcome to boards... If you are genuine then please do not be put off by this - But seriously you have a lot of learning ahead of you if that's how you work out your outs.

Yeah, cheers.

Well thats the way i would calculate it, obviously there are obstacles such as if you have a flush draw of hearts and your opponant has say two aces and two tens, you couldn't say that any heart would do..... your flush would be beaten if a ten or ace of hearts came up. if there is a better way tell me please.....

Culchie

Tackle69 wrote:

And if it was a 20% rake??? What difference would it make to you unless you finished in the prizes, fair enough if they increased the ammount of placing that would win money, but what if they just increased the winnings of the top ten(or whatever it is) and kept it at that. You misunderestimate me, its not exactly difficult to have a fair idea how many outs you have in a hand of poker, simply multiply the number of cards that can get you out of trouble by four and you will be close enough. The fact that i entered a tournament with a payout of only 60% is not troubling to me, i did it for a bit of craic, which i got. You seem very worried about these percentages.... i could easily say to you that you would be worried that if you bought a bar of chocolate for €1, you would be pissed off if you found out that it only cost 60 cent to make..... a point that shouldn't be taken to heart, but it probably will be.

Also i do not like my intelligence to be mocked in such a way, i may be knew to these boards, but you shouldn't be making presumptions when you don't know me.

I tell you what, we'll leave it that.

You want to compare chocolate bars with Poker tournaments, you go ahead.
If you think 40% is fine, and "what difference does it make unless I make the prizes" .... that's also fine....but you are in the wrong forum.
I haven't seen one other poster defend your position either...have you?

As I say, let's leave it at that, nothing more to say.

Degag

Duff Man Jr. wrote:

Yay i actually had 4 times the amt of outs i tought i had, i'm never lose again with these odds.

No that came out wrong, what i meant to say was, eg. if only an ace can get you out of trouble, there are 4 cards in the deck to save you.....

Pokerevents

azzeretti wrote:

Below is taken from Daniel Negreanu's blog. It could be somehting like this that made the TD at Celtic Poker made such a bad decision - unless I am missing something really stupid - in which case I am sorry and please delete this reply!

Ted called the turn and the river brought another 6, for a final board 6-6-4-A-6. I checked and made it rather obvious (at least to me) that I didn’t like that card. I figured that my A-Q was probably in the lead, unless of course Ted had A-K.

A-Q against A-K on this board is a............anyone?

Ted Had AA. But was afraid of that Dan had a 6 and did'nt bet.
Ted took down the pot with a bigger house A's over 6's against Dan's 6's over A's

azzeretti

Is there any point going over this same topic every couple of weeks. I think it is failry obvious that this poster is, in some way, connected to Celtic Poker. We all know that some players hate this type of event but they may be the only one within miles. This is a desicison the player must make and be willing to take. But that is a personl issue and to have someone force this one Boards is just wrong. 40% rake is nothing close to law breaking. You will not change the boards' regular posters who know this - stop wasting your time.
If you feel that this is a good event and you like throwing a certain amount of money away then fine, play away, its your prerogative to do so. But don't try to justify the rake/take/robbery here!

azzeretti

Pokerevents wrote:

Ted Had AA. But was afraid of that Dan had a 6 and did'nt bet.
Ted took down the pot with a bigger house A's over 6's against Dan's 6's over A's

I know, it was the original quote i thought there was a problem with - in his reasoning. Daniels reasoning behind the "bad" flat call was good too.

NickyOD

Tackle69 wrote:

No that came out wrong, what i meant to say was, eg. if only an ace can get you out of trouble, there are 4 cards in the deck to save you.....

OMG!! Where's that brick wall so I can bang my head off it. Post of the year!

Fatboydim

Tackle69 wrote:

Yeah, cheers.

Well thats the way i would calculate it, obviously there are obstacles such as if you have a flush draw of hearts and your opponant has say two aces and two tens, you couldn't say that any heart would do..... your flush would be beaten if a ten or ace of hearts came up. if there is a better way tell me please.....

There is no simple way as such... a four to the flush gives you nine outs... Open ended straight draw is eight outs etc etc... But obviously it depends on many factors and what you put your opponent on if you haven't seen his cards... But from your initial maths it would seem you are talking about live overcards. IE: you hold AK your opponent holds pocket tens... Assuming no straight or flush draws you have six outs to hit an ace or a king. In other words times by three not four.

roryc

How long have u been running CPT tackle.....

Degag

Fatboydim wrote:

There is no simple way as such... a four to the flush gives you nine outs... Open ended straight draw is eight outs etc etc... But obviously it depends on many factors and what you put your opponent on if you haven't seen his cards... But from your initial maths it would seem you are talking about live overcards. IE: you hold AK your opponent holds pocket tens... Assuming no straight or flush draws you have six outs to hit an ace or a king. In other words times by three not four.

Yes that was my reasoning too, except it came out wrong.... yeah you're right, 3 not 4 unless you're looking for a card to fill a blue or a straight etc etc etc.

OMG!! Where's that brick wall so I can bang my head off it. Post of the year!

Cool! Nah, three not four, my mistake, not intentional though....

Is there any point going over this same topic every couple of weeks. I think it is failry obvious that this poster is, in some way, connected to Celtic Poker.

Nope, i'm afraid not, or else i wouldn't be going to college and working in a pub......

Dub13

Fatboydim wrote:

At least with Pokerevents it’s all up front and nothing is hidden. In fact I remember going to the first event they held and questioning Fintan about the fact that the rebuys were originally not added to the prizepool. Fintan took the feedback from here and elsewhere and changed it.

I agree.I remember being at the first Pokerevents in Dublin (it could have been the second one) and there was a bit of an issue on her in the days after it,the event was advertised as a Double chance when it was a one re buy event.Fintan took the constructive criticism on board and changed.


The point being people like Mike and Fintan put there tournament's up on boards and its transparent,and they take suggestions.Poker players are customers not just "runners".The silence from CPT is deafening and I think it speaks volume's about there events.

I think most of the regulars on here would agree that we have had the odd (no names) insurgent on here from CPT.Why don't they step forward and explain there postion...?

NickyOD

Dub13 wrote:

Why don't they step forward and explain there postion...?

They wont talk about it via email or in a public forum, only on the phone apparrently.

lolkelly

Does anyone else find it really strange that A New Member, that is into poker, seems to come on every couple of weeks and defend CPT. And yet we dont see one other poker related thread or reply from these people!!!!

hotspur

Tackle69 wrote:

Nope, i'm afraid not, or else i wouldn't be going to college and working in a pub......

I'd concentrate more on the pub career if i were you lol.
Sorry if I'm "misunderestimating" you

Dub13

As I said they have insurgents here among us,they even run a course.




Can anybody recognize any posters in the photo....?

bohsman

Tackle69 wrote:

And if it was a 20% rake??? What difference would it make to you unless you finished in the prizes, fair enough if they increased the ammount of placing that would win money, but what if they just increased the winnings of the top ten(or whatever it is) and kept it at that. You misunderestimate me, its not exactly difficult to have a fair idea how many outs you have in a hand of poker, simply multiply the number of cards that can get you out of trouble by four and you will be close enough. The fact that i entered a tournament with a payout of only 60% is not troubling to me, i did it for a bit of craic, which i got. You seem very worried about these percentages.... i could easily say to you that you would be worried that if you bought a bar of chocolate for €1, you would be pissed off if you found out that it only cost 60 cent to make..... a point that shouldn't be taken to heart, but it probably will be.

Also i do not like my intelligence to be mocked in such a way, i may be knew to these boards, but you shouldn't be making presumptions when you don't know me.

And poker players play to make money not to have a bit of craic... if you get both its all good. Youre not going to make the money every week so the weeks you do make the money it needs to be worth your while playing every week. A 40% rake and you wont make money in the long term.

jtsuited

Tackle69 wrote:

3 not 4 unless you're looking for a card to fill a blue or a straight etc etc etc

QUOTE]

What is it about the use of the word blue that makes cringe?
Tackle, you're fooling nobody!

hotspur

jtsuited wrote:

What is it about the use of the word blue that makes cringe?
Tackle, you're fooling nobody!

I only came accross the term blue for the first time a couple of weeks ago when Nicky moaned about it's use. It's a working class flush yeah?

Lafortezza

No more abuse, even vague jibes please. Try not to discuss odds/hands in a thread about CPT.

I'd love if CPT were to come on to discuss this, I'm sure they're viewing it, especially if it's high in the list for a Google search.

Tackle69 is correct in that some players don't really give a monkey's how a tournaments prizefund is setup. They should, but they don't.
Where Tackle goes wrong is trying to defend these dodgy pay-outs against poker players who know what they are talking about and who find it totally unacceptable.

Tackle, if you know the people behind CPT tell them to get on here and defend themselves. At the moment they are considered a joke by the people on this forum. And you'd be surprised at the influence this forum/Antesup and the resulting word of mouth has.

Degag

jtsuited wrote:

Tackle69 wrote:

3 not 4 unless you're looking for a card to fill a blue or a straight etc etc etc

QUOTE]

What is it about the use of the word blue that makes cringe?
Tackle, you're fooling nobody!

Fooling no one???? you think i'm apart of this business aswell???:rolleyes:

No more abuse, even vague jibes please. Try not to discuss odds/hands in a thread about CPT.

I'd love if CPT were to come on to discuss this, I'm sure they're viewing it, especially if it's high in the list for a Google search.

Tackle69 is correct in that some players don't really give a monkey's how a tournaments prizefund is setup. They should, but they don't.
Where Tackle goes wrong is trying to defend these dodgy pay-outs against poker players who know what they are talking about and who find it totally unacceptable.

Tackle, if you know the people behind CPT tell them to get on here and defend themselves. At the moment they are considered a joke by the people on this forum. And you'd be surprised at the influence this forum/Antesup and the resulting word of mouth has.

Hey, fair play to you. you hit the nail on the head, i went in the last night for a bit of fun, a few drinks, and it cost me a bit, but so what..... it was about the same as a good night out. ie. getting completely langered.... i can the point of view of poker players here who are in it for the money.... i just wish they could see mine and others for whom that is not necessarily the point of view...