Topic: Bitcointalk Poker Series format discussion - Let's keep them all in one place. - page 7. (Read 1879 times)

I do track the number of participants per tournament at the very bottom of the main sheet and one could also look at the worst placing in each tournament. The problem is, that SwC has to do some setting in their software, because when the entry fee is increased to 1,200 (including the 200 extra chips) and you have 10 players, the entry fees total 12,000 chips, but the actual prize pool for that tournament is only 10,000 for payout. So these 2,000 chips must not belong to prize pool and I don't know, if this is easily doable for SwC.

Adding these chips to Grand Final should be easy, because they sponsor it anyway and would just have to up the prize pool accordingly.

One thing about dragging the tournament for a much longer period is that it will lose all the hype and tension compare with the current one. However I do agree the needs to make the tournament into one tournament per week due to some real life issue catching up

So instead of still having 8 regular game + 1 Grand Final, probably we could downsize it to 5 regular + 1 grand final which would take up to 6 weeks then we can take a rest for 2 - 4 weeks before proceeding the next one if there will be the next one However the downside with this is that with only 5 regular game, it would be hard for some player to get points

---

Definitely this is the best option. We could just count the number of player manually in every regular tournament and then notify SWC about the extra 200 chips per player in the prizepool for the grandfinal

---

Also Posting this here as well for visibility

This would by far the easiest solution for you guys, and at the same time very fair to all participants. If you guys have good contact at SwC ask them and see what they think about it, how much additional work it adds to them. Maybe they already have some script ready and it is a matter of just using it and configuring to take 200 chips.

---

I would prefer 1 tournament per week (on Sunday) format as well. I would like to be a part of every tournament but real life is getting more and more demanding....don't know how long I will be able to keep current tempo.

And the series can take as long as it is necessary, we could have it for 2 months to keep current number of tournaments. Or maybe as quarterly thing. One series takes 3 months (10 regular tournaments + big finale and a bit of rest, or casual game to have fun).

I see 3 alternatives:

1) All players send their extra chips after the 8 tournaments have finished according to their number of participations. Problem: You will have players that forget or have gone awol and efialtis will have to run after that money.

2) All players send their chips upfront and get refunded for tournaments they didn't join. If someone joins only at tournament #3 f.e., he would have to send 6x200 = 1200 for remaining ones. Problem: Will turn off newbies, that want to try first and people that just join from time to time for whatever reason.

3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

I agree with one-game-per-week format. I don't know if this format is the ideal one, but if we want to to attract more players to our series, we should at least try it for once.

Of course, the opinions of those who are not participating currently, but would like to join if some changes to the format were made, are the most valuable now, imo.

So, dear potential participants, if you have any suggestions regarding timing, ticket price, frequency etc., please, speak up!

We can definitely discuss playing one game per weekend (Sunday ideally) over the course of two months - makes sense to me and will make my life organizing things easier, too, tbh. Sending out PWs etc. and being "there" each Saturday & Sunday evening/night is quite hard - especially for the people who'd like to spend time with me - surprisingly, there are a few, haha.

I agree with the 1 tournament a week. For me it's due to the time they start noon. So I have a house full and 2 kiddos staring at Dad lol.

Not sure how big a deal it is to most but it could help some spread out their budget for playing as well.

i think Hhampuz might be onto something here:


after the current series ends, maybe we should transition to once per week. a sunday poker game maybe? people with less free time to commit are more likely to participate in the league that way.

i'm down to play twice a week myself, but i think we can see from april vs may turnouts that not everyone feels that way.

There should be a grand finale, and there should be a prize for point leaders! Of course only one thing is a problem, money! We need to add more money, but cost of each tournament will not be ok with everyone, the same is with adding more chips to Efi (instead 200, it can be 400 or 500). SwC turns to be a great site for us, like a real sponsors of tournament they added chips, hat and from this series a ticket for big btc tournament! Can we find more sponsors?! And how!? If we can do that, then entry and fees can stay the same, and will not be a burden for existing and new players!

Two options for now, we can either lower prizes and spread them, or we can make these tournaments more expensive!


Agree! We will not find a solution that will suit everyone, but as long as majority agrees we can make certain changes! There're good ideas and suggestions, I think only money is holding us back for now (or more players that will add more)! Anyway we have healthy discussions, whatever comes up from that will be good definitely!

A useful topic created with good thinking. But first, we need to know that. If we can build a community of enough people here, can we make a change? What I want to say is that it's not just a topic that people talk about but has no conclusions.

Thanks for creating this thread mate - great idea. You guys discuss the future point system etc. and I will obey. I hope everyone is cool with changes being made for the next series though.

good idea. it seems like everyone and their grandma has a different plan for how the points system should work. i guess there are lots of game theory considerations.

i posted a link to this thread earlier, where i think a lot of important points are covered.

the #1 goal to keep in mind IMO:


with that in mind, these are the most common structures:

linear points: (n-r+1) where n = number of entrants and r = rank placed. so for a field of 18 players:

1st place = 18 points
18th place = 1 point

points = ITM: points are based on tournament cashes. this is very top-heavy. the top 16.67% cash in a 30-man tournament on SwC.

what we did: a hybrid take on linear points, where we flattened the payouts on both sides. the top players get less, but the bottom players get none.

i'm seeing people lobbying for both flatter payouts and more top-heavy ones, so i'm not sure we'll end up changing what seems like a reasonable compromise.

if we did implement something more top-heavy---like some of the curve/sqrt based systems, or linear points but only paying out the top x% of the field---we should consider rules that keep the series competitive (nods to the #1 goal stated above). one way some leagues do that is to require a minimum # of games played, with only your top x number of games counting towards points standings. that could help offset variance so people can still recover from a few bad runs.

the most common argument against flat structures (like linear points) is they can encourage points angling. i think it's debatable how much of an edge late registration or sitouts gives there. it's annoying but i dunno if it makes a big difference. one additional way this could be addressed is by awarding points for KOs to induce action. lol, so many angles to consider!

This is just a landing page topic to discuss changes and preferences for the tournament series already running on SWC. I will Self-Mod this thread to keep the discussion relevant and between participants. This is separate from discussing specific tournaments and hands.

Hopefully doing it this way will allow us to gather all the ideas in one place and if we can come up with a consensus or majority whatever works best, then we can ask for changes. I would also like to suggest we make changes to a series before it starts and let it run it's course before requesting any other changes.

Bring it all. Seats at the table, Starting chips, Level duration. I thin k there has also been some debate about the overall tournament schedule and point system.