Tournament Analysis - ooh I just got Zithal's attention

Can someone show some numbers to show which is a better structure?

HORSE
1800 starting chips, 12 min blinds
1. 20/40
2. 30/60
3. 40/80/8
4. 60/120/12
5. 80/160/16
6. 100/200
7. 150/300
8. 200/400/40
9. 300/600/60
10. 400/800/80
11. 500/1000
12. 750/1500
13. 1000/2000/200
14. 1500/3000/300
15. 2000/4000/400
16. 2500/5000
17. 4000/8000
18. 5000/10000/1000
19. 8000/16000/1500
20. 12500/25000/2500

2000 starting chips, 10 min blinds
1. 30/60
2. 30/60
3. 60/120/12
4. 60/120/12
5. 60/120/12
6. 150/300
7. 150/300
8. 270/540/54
9. 270/540/54
10. 270/540/54
11. 400/800
12. 400/800
13. 800/1600/160
14. 800/1600/160
15. 800/1600/160
16. 1800/3600
17. 1800/3600
18. 3000/6000/600
19. 3000/6000/600
20. 3000/6000/600

3000 starting chips, 12 min blinds
1. 10/20
2. 20/40
3. 40/80/8
4. 60/120/12
5. 80/160/16
6. 100/200
7. 150/300
8. 200/400/40
9. 300/600/60
10. 400/800/80
11. 500/1000
12. 750/1500
13. 1000/2000/200
14. 1500/3000/300
15. 2000/4000/400
16. 3000/6000
17. 4000/8000
18. 6000/12000/1200
19. 8000/16000/1600
20. 10000/20000/2000

1500 chips, 10 min blinds
1. 20/40
2. 30/60
3. 40/80/8
4. 60/120/12
5. 80/160/16
6. 100/200
7. 150/300
8. 200/400/40
9. 300/600/60
10. 400/800/80
11. 500/1000
12. 750/1500
13. 1000/2000/200
14. 1500/3000/300
15. 2000/4000/400
16. 3000/6000
17. 5000/10000
18. 7500/15000/1500
19. 10000/20000/2000
20. 20000/40000/4000

1500 chips, 10 min
1. 20/40
2. 30/60
3. 40/80/7
4. 50/100/10
5. 60/120/10
6. 80/160
7. 100/200
8. 120/240/20
9. 150/300/25
10. 200/400/30
11. 250/500
12. 300/600
13. 400/800/75
14. 500/1000/100
15. 600/1200/100
16. 800/1600
17. 1000/2000
18. 1200/2400/200
19. 1500/3000/250
20. 2000/4000/300

Comments

  • moose wrote: »
    Can someone show some numbers to show which is a better structure?

    Sure - how about the numbers 3, 8, 9, 10, and 54? 3 levels (8, 9 and 10) have an ante of 54. This proves #1 is better. :)
  • If you are joking you have lost me. Especially since the 54 antes are in structure #2.
  • moose wrote: »
    If you are joking you have lost me. Especially since the 54 antes are in structure #2.
    The fact that #2 has a 54 ante means #1 is better. A little joke (really little if I have to explain it) but partly serious - it would not be much fun to post that, wait for everyone else to figure it out or play 2 hands/level with the delays.

    It does appear you have a bunch more structures posted (I only noticed the 2 earlier) - I'll look at it a bit more seriously now and post later...
  • Dude these are online tourneys. They could make the ante 54.54 and it wouldn't make a bit of difference.
  • moose wrote: »
    Dude these are online tourneys. They could make the ante 54.54 and it wouldn't make a bit of difference.

    lol

    I like the last one better
  • moose wrote: »
    Can someone show some numbers to show which is a better structure?

    HORSE
    1800 starting chips, 12 min blinds

    2000 starting chips, 10 min blinds

    3000 starting chips, 12 min blinds

    1500 chips, 10 min blinds

    1500 chips, 10 min


    #1 has a Patience factor of 5.44, skill level of 2 (1.40 hours until blind off)
    #2 has a Patience factor of 4.12, skill level of 1 (1.22 hours until blind off)
    #3 has a Patience factor of 7.42, skill level of 3 (1.63 hours until blind off)
    #4 has a Patience factor of 3.78, skill level of 1 (1.17 hours until blind off)
    #5 has a Patience factor of 4.57, skill level of 2 (1.28 hours until blind off)


    New rule for this site.... nobody post more than 2 structures to compare... man that took forever.
  • For a HORSE game I think over all the blind levels are too short. You are going to get in only about 3 to 4 hands during the Stud rounds if using one deck.
  • These are ONLINE tourneys. ONLINE ONLINE ONLINE.
  • CanadaDave wrote: »
    #1 has a Patience factor of 5.44, skill level of 2 (1.40 hours until blind off)
    #2 has a Patience factor of 4.12, skill level of 1 (1.22 hours until blind off)
    #3 has a Patience factor of 7.42, skill level of 3 (1.63 hours until blind off)
    #4 has a Patience factor of 3.78, skill level of 1 (1.17 hours until blind off)
    #5 has a Patience factor of 4.57, skill level of 2 (1.28 hours until blind off)


    New rule for this site.... nobody post more than 2 structures to compare... man that took forever.

    Hey it took me a long time to type them in. Thanks for running through them. Please recheck your numbers. Structure #2 has lower blinds progression than every structure except for the last one so I am surprised your analysis ranks it 2nd worst. Also, you realize that the 3rd # is not an ante, but the bring in for the razz and stud levels?
  • Ahhhh...what sites?
  • Multiple. I am not revealing the buyin or site so as to not influence any analysis.
  • moose wrote: »
    Hey it took me a long time to type them in. Thanks for running through them. Please recheck your numbers. Structure #2 has lower blinds progression than every structure except for the last one so I am surprised your analysis ranks it 2nd worst. Also, you realize that the 3rd # is not an ante, but the bring in for the razz and stud levels?

    oh fudge... ignore those numbers then.... i was half asleep at my desk when I ran them... sorry moose.
  • For evaluating tournaments I like the system of calculating what your M will be in an hour if you just pay the blinds/antes/bringins.

    M is the cost of playing one orbit in blinds (plus antes and bringins if any)

    After I hour of being blinded off...
    If your M is <5 it's a no skills donkament
    5<M<10 low skill
    10<M<20 Med skill
    M>20 High skill

    I think this system is more accessible than Arnold Snyder's system.
  • For evaluating tournaments I like the system of calculating what your M will be in an hour if you just pay the blinds/antes/bringins.

    M is the cost of playing one orbit in blinds (plus antes and bringins if any)

    After I hour of being blinded off...
    If your M is <5 it's a no skills donkament
    5<M<10 low skill
    10<M<20 Med skill
    M>20 High skill

    I think this system is more accessible than Arnold Snyder's system.
Sign In or Register to comment.