Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcointalk Poker Series format discussion - Let's keep them all in one place. - page 3. (Read 1861 times)

legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2691
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?

Don't know why but 7 sounds strange to me Smiley I sort of expect an even number I guess

I already wrote somewhere that it doesn't really matter to me if it is anything between 4-10 tournaments. Less than four isn't a series and more than 10 would really stretch it too long. I suggested to @efi that he tries to feel out the SwC and see if they will give us better bonus if we play more tournaments in the series. If they will not, than it makes sense to play smaller number of tournaments, just enough to keep our sponsors happy.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1483
It is easy to raise buy ins and rewards for each tournament in unofficial way. Few of as just agree here on the forum for let's say 1000-2000 chips per person to spice it up and the one who stays on the table longest gets the money. I think all the regulars can be trusted with such amounts so there is no need to collect anything upfront. When the tournament ends we just send the chips to the winner.

i agree that we're probably near the upper bound for buy-ins. there's no exact science to it, but my impression is that if we get much closer to 0.002 BTC per game it will discourage participation.

1400 chips/game is enough action for me, but i'm open to a last longer bet or other ways to make it interesting if it's not enough for others.

any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play

So for 300 chips difference you would rather sacrifice a player like me who started playing before series, and in first tournaments we played there was 5-6 of us, for some "new player" that can come play one game and leave the series?
The main point of this tournament was fun for friends from btctalk, not to gather more players. More players would mean more fun, but as I remember in the beginning it was lets play poker and have fun, anyone who wishes to join is welcome to do that, we play nice poker with good poker players and above that with good people!
Lottery system is a nice motivation for me as well, and for every player! With higher buy in we will have higher prizes. Now you wish to attract more players with lower buy in, where we will have lower prizes, and I say lets make higher buy in, prizes will be higher, that will be a motivation for people to join!

Would be nice if you stop gunning down on me  Wink . You know its not my call to decide things over here. If you want to have 1500 chips buy in you have to form consensus here by asking the others to agree with your opinion. I cant force my opinion neither can you, thats the whole nice stuff of forming consensus


Now you tell me Arallmuss do you wish 50 new players in tournament with lower prizes, or you wish to see 10 new players and higher prizes? To make it more simple, do you think we need to put quality over quantity or quantity over quality?

50 players with 300 chips buy in = 15000 chips prizepool
10 players with 1500 chips buy in = 15000 chips prizepool

Lower number of player doesnt always means higher prizepool Wink. and thats 5 times higher buy in than the first one
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2691
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
I am always for quality before quantity but we are loosing players as the tournaments go on and not gaining new ones to replace the ones who left. If we drop below 18 players (2 full tables) the game will start to get less interesting, at least for me. SwC will also probably stop sponsoring us if we drop below certain level. That is the reason why I am willing to make some concessions in order to keep the game running. I feel like one tournament per week was a step in the right direction so we will see how it goes in this series.

It is easy to raise buy ins and rewards for each tournament in unofficial way. Few of as just agree here on the forum for let's say 1000-2000 chips per person to spice it up and the one who stays on the table longest gets the money. I think all the regulars can be trusted with such amounts so there is no need to collect anything upfront. When the tournament ends we just send the chips to the winner.
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1179
It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play

So for 300 chips difference you would rather sacrifice a player like me who started playing before series, and in first tournaments we played there was 5-6 of us, for some "new player" that can come play one game and leave the series?
The main point of this tournament was fun for friends from btctalk, not to gather more players. More players would mean more fun, but as I remember in the beginning it was lets play poker and have fun, anyone who wishes to join is welcome to do that, we play nice poker with good poker players and above that with good people!
Lottery system is a nice motivation for me as well, and for every player! With higher buy in we will have higher prizes. Now you wish to attract more players with lower buy in, where we will have lower prizes, and I say lets make higher buy in, prizes will be higher, that will be a motivation for people to join! Now you tell me Arallmuss do you wish 50 new players in tournament with lower prizes, or you wish to see 10 new players and higher prizes? To make it more simple, do you think we need to put quality over quantity or quantity over quality?
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

Sorry, but I can't understand this. Both of you are saying that 100 chips makes some big difference here?
Who wishes to play will play with 1.2 or 1.5, because it's not a big difference. And if we wish to attract more people with lower buy-in than let's talk about 0.5 mbtc? Many people can afford that, and we can have 200 chips for entry, 150 chips for grand finale and lottery? Or you can arrange it anyhow, that will lead to lower prize pool! We can play for dollars or pennies, it's a big difference and there're people who don't wish to play for pennies.
And it's something we discussed, with more money you can offer more, and that can attract new players. In the end everything comes down to what you get for your money, for me 1.5 mbtc is reasonable amount because we will have a chance to win some tournament, for the sit in grand finale, lottery… and all that prizes depends on entry fee.

It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play
legendary
Activity: 1554
Merit: 2037
In regards to number of qualifiers personally I would like it to be 7/8. I will likely miss half of the tournaments barring a slow Sunday at work. I don't think the 2 months time frame to the Championship will kill the "action". It would mostly allow people such as myself to still feel there is a chance to qualify even if you miss a few.

Nice catch on being able to use regular 1k satellites for our tourneys I wouldn't have thought of it. Specialty ones for us wouldn't work until we are much bigger. SWC shouldn't also have to essentially freeroll satellite tickets for us as well.

Anyone on the fence or looking for a freeroll should keep vigilant on the 3rd series thread once posted. There have been some generous members who have paid the entry for a new participant in the past. You might get lucky.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1483
There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Regards.

you can directly buy into our tournaments with any 1k ticket---although that won't cover the separate league buy-ins sent to @efialtis.

unfortunately, there aren't too many scheduled satellites that pay 1k tickets (mostly 2k-5k tickets) but i do see 2 in the lobby---one starting in ~1 hour and one that runs in 2 days. there are also 3 types of sit-and-go satellites (buy-in 250 chips) that pay out 1k tickets.

i have a feeling that running direct satellites won't be too fruitful.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2691
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Never even crossed my mind since there isn't so much of us here. Now we will have a tournament every Sunday and we could set up a satellite with minimal buy in on Saturday if that is not to much work for SwC. Maybe something with buy in of 200 chips, minimal 7 players and winner gets ticket for the tournament on Sunday. If there is more players winner gets some BTC as well or several players get the ticket.

I love the idea but have a feeling that it would create a lot of hassle for efi and SwC for minimal gains. 
legendary
Activity: 1918
Merit: 3047
LE ☮︎ Halving es la purga
but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! Smiley In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

I still feel our number one priority has to be attraction of new players even though reality is probably that only regulars will play. We can always make side bets or something to spice it up even more. For example I would gladly made a bit with another person at my table, or even several. I guess we don't have late reg now so there will not be many seating changes. When the game starts we can make a bet of let's say 1-2 mBTC and the person who last longest takes it. We did something like that for the first tournament of the first series. 

It's not really about how much a tournament costs, the focus that should be given is what type of players it is suitable for. If we look at the SWC ecosystem there is traffic that tends more to low stakes or micro buyin.

I play a $ 15 tournament not only because I want to but because my bankroll allows it, it is not about being able to put money in "x mmt", I could play the cost of $ 85 but I would be breaking my bankroll control rule. I support any initiative and I can even support it without the need to play tournaments.

First of all you always have to maintain objectivity, someone said that he would not play for pennies, ok. But then where is the community, player who does not have much if they must put their bankroll at risk.

When I speak of bankroll is the money you have to play or that you have planned to spend, here it is not about measuring your ability to make deposits, not having $ 85 or "$ x" does not mean that you are poor, etc. , it is only an amount "$x" destined to play.

There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Regards.


legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1179
For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

Sorry, but I can't understand this. Both of you are saying that 100 chips makes some big difference here?
Who wishes to play will play with 1.2 or 1.5, because it's not a big difference. And if we wish to attract more people with lower buy-in than let's talk about 0.5 mbtc? Many people can afford that, and we can have 200 chips for entry, 150 chips for grand finale and lottery? Or you can arrange it anyhow, that will lead to lower prize pool! We can play for dollars or pennies, it's a big difference and there're people who don't wish to play for pennies.
And it's something we discussed, with more money you can offer more, and that can attract new players. In the end everything comes down to what you get for your money, for me 1.5 mbtc is reasonable amount because we will have a chance to win some tournament, for the sit in grand finale, lottery… and all that prizes depends on entry fee.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 2691
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! Smiley In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

I still feel our number one priority has to be attraction of new players even though reality is probably that only regulars will play. We can always make side bets or something to spice it up even more. For example I would gladly made a bit with another person at my table, or even several. I guess we don't have late reg now so there will not be many seating changes. When the game starts we can make a bet of let's say 1-2 mBTC and the person who last longest takes it. We did something like that for the first tournament of the first series. 
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! Smiley In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.



6 tournaments + 1 Grand Finale is good for me. 7 weeks and Efialtis might have considered something to add to the following weeks for the winners I guess lol, I'll go with his decision


and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1179
Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!

thanks.

you sure you don't wanna go for 8 qualifiers though? i don't mind a 2 month series personally. i think some other folks expressed that view too. i kinda prefer a longer series to reduce variance and/or allow for missing a game. i also think SwC might be more likely to keep sponsoring if the championships weren't that frequent. i'll defer to the crowd of course, but 6 games feels a little short to me.

thoughts? maybe meet in the middle with 7 qualifiers? that would mean 8 weeks total for a series. that seems like a good round number.

First to say thank you Efi for arranging this once again! Smiley Can we do something for you man? You did a lot for all of us, can we repay you somehow? Smiley

I'm with you Foma Smiley, we can stretch this for two months, one game per week, why not? With keeping the same amount for grand finale and adding a lottery with 200 extra chips, this will be very interesting!
1.4 is ok, and I am smiling while I wrote this because I feel like an idiot for adding more and more suggestions, but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! Smiley In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1483
Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!

thanks.

you sure you don't wanna go for 8 qualifiers though? i don't mind a 2 month series personally. i think some other folks expressed that view too. i kinda prefer a longer series to reduce variance and/or allow for missing a game. i also think SwC might be more likely to keep sponsoring if the championships weren't that frequent. i'll defer to the crowd of course, but 6 games feels a little short to me.

thoughts? maybe meet in the middle with 7 qualifiers? that would mean 8 weeks total for a series. that seems like a good round number.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1363
www.gosubetting.com
Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!
legendary
Activity: 1652
Merit: 1483
it sounds like we basically have consensus for sundays only. most people seem good with the 1400 chip buy-in too. i'm cool with both.

are we thinking 8 qualifiers then? or less?

Moreover, reaching to championship already means that you have made some good money in first 8 legs.

in series #2 i actually never cashed until the championship. lots of bubbles for me! Tongue

Are we planning to give points to every participant in reverse order or point system would still be limited to top 10 in every leg?

i think we've given up on changing the points structure. if we end up doing the reverse order scheme i think we should weight the top places.

Hey guys, just to make sure that I got all things straight. The lottery is for everyone or for those guys who haven´t qualified for
the final table? I´m not the biggest fan of that lottery idea either way because it´s pure gamble but of course it wouldn´t stop me of playing the
next poker series  Cheesy Cheesy

it's a pure gamble yes, which i normally don't like, but i like it because it encourages people to keep playing in the series.

if i've played the first 4 games and have 0 points going into game #5, the lottery + regular prize pools are still a pretty good reason to stay in the series, EV wise.
legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
I am interested, but I have issues ie no job now so not that flush.

Is the lottery anyone can win it?

It should be because it is as an incentive for people to keep joining the game although they may dont have a chance to get into Grand Finale anymore. There is no clear set format regarding how this works yet but if you are interested you might want to check Tyki's post Here and Here

We might use this format for the lottery so more participant + points could means more lottery ticket



Lets play together on the 3rd series Globb0  Wink
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 2053
Free spirit
I am interested, but I have issues ie no job now so not that flush.

Is the lottery anyone can win it?






legendary
Activity: 2562
Merit: 1414
@arallmuus

Once a week, either Sunday or Saturday are fine for me and Yes Im okay with the 1400 buy in

Moreover, reaching to championship already means that you have made some good money in first 8 legs.

Not really, according to the spreadsheet from the second season you could get into the Grand Finale if you have 26 points ( If we discarded the AVG feature on the spreadsheet )

That means constant placing on minimum 7th rank for 6 times will get 24 points. You just need two more points to get into Grand Finale. The last two regular tournament was less than 15 people so it would be easy to just play safe and aim for 10th rank two times

IIRC only 3 or 4 places paid during the regular tournament so not everyone that get into the Grand Finale actually pocket some prizes during the regular game
Pages:
Jump to: