Changes for Bristol Street in 2006?
Hey all,
I wanted to start a thread to collect comments on how you think the Bristol Street Classic events should be changed, if at all, for the 2006 season. What do you like about them, what don't you like? I'm going to seperate the comments into sections, so that you can respond to a specific section.
A) Format - Currently $10 + 2R, no add-ons. 32 player max
The original purpose of rebuys was to let the opening levels be a little looser, to get some fun play in. Do we want to keep the rebuys? Should it be reduced to 1 and throw in an add-on? Should we turn it into a freeze-out, and raise the buy-in/chipcount?
I like having it a low buy in tournament. Investing $10 for a night's entertainment ain't a bad deal, and while the turnout is increasing with more people on a waiting list, I know that upping the buy-in will reduce numbers, but I don't want to lose people by making it too expensive to buy in.
The 32 player max is one that I'd have a hard time going higher on.
Chips - Currently 2,500 starting chips, rebuy at 500 or less for 2,500.
Tied in with the above, I've come to like that this starting chip count. I have been debating adding a requirement to bust out before being about to rebuy. The 500 or less req'ment is kind of odd the longer I use it and has created some wierd situations. Keep it or lose it? Should the re-buy be for more than the starting chip count? (ie. $10 for 3,000 as $10 for 3,000 at the 100-200(25) level has less value per dollar than your initial $10 for 2,500 chips. If you vote to have an add-on, what are your thoughts on that?
C) Blind Schedule - Currently with antes, blind schedule assuming the average player has 5,000 chips (one rebuy) after the rebuy end.
I like the antes and I'd be very hard pressed to get rid of them. The ante is no more than 1/3 of the small blind, which I've heard people complain about, but it no different than a WSOP schedule. Currently, play ends sometime between 12am and 1am and so far no one's complained. (Usually there only 5-8 people left after 11pm any way.)
I'd like to add a 25-25 level to start and fix the 300-600(75) level to be a more proper 300-600(100) and have that the first level after the colour up. If this is a popular choice, how would this affect rebuys, (keep rebuys at the first 4 levels, or extend it to five levels?)
D) Points - Currently you get 1 point to start and add one for each player that goes out.
I dislike the way points are distrubuted. It doesn't at all seem fair that finishing 1st in a 24 player tournament is the same number of points as finishing 9th in a 32 player tournament. Horribly scewed to playing in larger tournaments.
Alternate suggestions? Here's a few...
Use the sq.root formula that's used for the pokerforum standings and the Lucky Lou Poker Tour.
Keep the 1 point per place, but add bonus points for the top finishers. (ie. 1st +15, 2nd +10, 3rd +6, 4th +3, 5th +2, 6th +1)
E) Waiting List - Currently seeds the next tournament
I don't like how it worked out for the last tournament (most of the people dropped out anyway.) I could take a tough-luck approach, but that seems really cold. Any half-way approach that I could take?
F) Type of Events - Currently all No-Limit Hold'em
Should we add a couple non No-Limit events to the schedule and count them for points?
G) Qualifying for GRAND FINAL - currently sum of Top 4 scores.
I like using Top 4 because, while it's advantageous to play more tournaments, the advantage is somewhat lessened. Is 4 a good number?
H) GRAND FINAL - $40 buy-in freeze-out, increased chip-count longer blinds. 18 person max.
I like keeping the cap low, because it really then becomes something to work for. I think the only thing I'd considering changing is seeding the final event with money from the previous events. For example, take $20 from each tournament and that seeds the pool for the GRAND FINAL. Worried that this would be construed as a rake.
I) Anything else?
What else would you change/alter? Speak your mind before we hit 2006.
I wanted to start a thread to collect comments on how you think the Bristol Street Classic events should be changed, if at all, for the 2006 season. What do you like about them, what don't you like? I'm going to seperate the comments into sections, so that you can respond to a specific section.
A) Format - Currently $10 + 2R, no add-ons. 32 player max
The original purpose of rebuys was to let the opening levels be a little looser, to get some fun play in. Do we want to keep the rebuys? Should it be reduced to 1 and throw in an add-on? Should we turn it into a freeze-out, and raise the buy-in/chipcount?
I like having it a low buy in tournament. Investing $10 for a night's entertainment ain't a bad deal, and while the turnout is increasing with more people on a waiting list, I know that upping the buy-in will reduce numbers, but I don't want to lose people by making it too expensive to buy in.
The 32 player max is one that I'd have a hard time going higher on.
Chips - Currently 2,500 starting chips, rebuy at 500 or less for 2,500.Tied in with the above, I've come to like that this starting chip count. I have been debating adding a requirement to bust out before being about to rebuy. The 500 or less req'ment is kind of odd the longer I use it and has created some wierd situations. Keep it or lose it? Should the re-buy be for more than the starting chip count? (ie. $10 for 3,000 as $10 for 3,000 at the 100-200(25) level has less value per dollar than your initial $10 for 2,500 chips. If you vote to have an add-on, what are your thoughts on that?
C) Blind Schedule - Currently with antes, blind schedule assuming the average player has 5,000 chips (one rebuy) after the rebuy end.
I like the antes and I'd be very hard pressed to get rid of them. The ante is no more than 1/3 of the small blind, which I've heard people complain about, but it no different than a WSOP schedule. Currently, play ends sometime between 12am and 1am and so far no one's complained. (Usually there only 5-8 people left after 11pm any way.)
I'd like to add a 25-25 level to start and fix the 300-600(75) level to be a more proper 300-600(100) and have that the first level after the colour up. If this is a popular choice, how would this affect rebuys, (keep rebuys at the first 4 levels, or extend it to five levels?)
D) Points - Currently you get 1 point to start and add one for each player that goes out.
I dislike the way points are distrubuted. It doesn't at all seem fair that finishing 1st in a 24 player tournament is the same number of points as finishing 9th in a 32 player tournament. Horribly scewed to playing in larger tournaments.
Alternate suggestions? Here's a few...
Use the sq.root formula that's used for the pokerforum standings and the Lucky Lou Poker Tour.
Keep the 1 point per place, but add bonus points for the top finishers. (ie. 1st +15, 2nd +10, 3rd +6, 4th +3, 5th +2, 6th +1)
E) Waiting List - Currently seeds the next tournament
I don't like how it worked out for the last tournament (most of the people dropped out anyway.) I could take a tough-luck approach, but that seems really cold. Any half-way approach that I could take?
F) Type of Events - Currently all No-Limit Hold'em
Should we add a couple non No-Limit events to the schedule and count them for points?
G) Qualifying for GRAND FINAL - currently sum of Top 4 scores.
I like using Top 4 because, while it's advantageous to play more tournaments, the advantage is somewhat lessened. Is 4 a good number?
H) GRAND FINAL - $40 buy-in freeze-out, increased chip-count longer blinds. 18 person max.
I like keeping the cap low, because it really then becomes something to work for. I think the only thing I'd considering changing is seeding the final event with money from the previous events. For example, take $20 from each tournament and that seeds the pool for the GRAND FINAL. Worried that this would be construed as a rake.
I) Anything else?
What else would you change/alter? Speak your mind before we hit 2006.
Comments
Cameron
For my KPS (Keatsway Poker Series) I am going to have a points system for earning entry into the Championship, but it is going to be a bit different from the 1 point per position you used in 2005. Â The # of points a player earns will be based on 1 point per position, plus bonus points for how many tables busted out before they did, plus a percentage of their earnings (for the players in the $) will add additional points.
/g2
c) Sounds fine. 4 levels is enough.
d) Points - use this:
points = sqr(weight) * (10 * sqr(# of players) / sqr(rank) - 9)
Where weight = (buy-in amount) / 10
Which is probably the same formula you are referring to.
e) Waiting list seeding is fine. If it can also be carried over if the player can't make the next tourney. I only played in 3 events because it is rare for me to be available on a Wed or the rare nights I could play, the tourney filled before I could get on the list.
f) I would like to see a limit holdem event. Omaha h/l would be fun too.
gh) Top 4 is good or maybe 5. I'd rather see a larger field for the GF though (24 or 32). Some of the champions that are in the GF are actually very low in points. Almost impossible to qualify without winning an event.
Yes! More game variety.
The first Bristol event I attended was the 7-card stud tourney. It was a hoot, even though it didn't contribute to the series rankings.
I know most players prefer NL HE, but it'd be nice to see different games become part of the series (with points awarded). Stud, Omaha, NL and limit varieties. 2-7 lowball was fun too. Maybe one in five events can be something other than NL HE?
Either way I'm attending every event I can make it out too, regardless.
Steve
I would strongly prefer the more traditional method of re-buys being allowed at the level of the initial stack size or less. (Requiring the stack size to be at least one chip strictly less than the initial stack to re-buy, say $2,495 in this case, is just silly.) The same amount of tournament chips ($2,500) for the same monetary buy-in ($10) makes the most sense.
I'm reluctant to get into the reasons that I prefer the "usual" method compared to a short (or no) stack re-buy requirement, since I can imagine having to do a bit of walking on broken glass. Let me just say that I think that you might know what I am talking about (rather, not talking about) since you have refered to "some weird sitautions".
Keeping it to a finite number of re-buys fits well with the low buy-in nature of the events that (I think) you prefer. The exact number of re-buys to offer is tricky, and probably in the "see how it goes and tweak if necessary" category.
An add-on is really a matter of personal preference. Assuming that most people would take the add-on, it really does nothing more than build the prize pool, and require that the post-add-on blind/ante schedule be adjusted to account for the fact that there was (or was not, as the case may be) an add-on.
Some casual players tend to have a sour reaction to add-ons, feeling that they are "forced". Whether or not such reactions make sense logically, they do occur, and such feelings (for whatever reason) seem to be instigated more often by add-ons (which are often perceived as mandatory) than re-buys (often perceived as optional).
ScottyZ
P.S. My appoligies if you now have an Annie Lennox song going through your head like I do.
+1 point for each position (just like Bristol)
+1 point for making it past the 1st table collapse
+2 points for making it past the 2nd table collapse
+3 points for making it past the 3rd table collapse
+4 points for making it past the 4th table collapse (a.k.a. making the final table)
+X points, where X = the $ made / divided by your total buy-in (incl. rebuys)
+X points, where X = the number of bounty chips won
-1 point for each rebuy (so technically you can have a negative score: rebuy twice & be first out)
Based on 40 players (5 tables of 8 ), the winner then receives roughly 75 points. If you're interested in seeing the spreadsheet I used to work the numbers out PM me.
Each player's top 3 scores will count towards the leaderboard, and ties will be broken using 4th best score. There will be at least 6, most likely 7 official KPS tourneys. But, of course, there will be many other KPS-branded nights of poker coming up in the new year.
What do you guys think?
/g2
this doesn't really matter to me however if you eliminate the rebuys raise the buy in. Â My preference is for freeze outs, but even I have rebuys at the tourneys I run. Â
I understand your space limitations so going higher than 32 is very difficult.
Again the starting chip count is fine. Â It allows for lots of play (along with the rebuys) for every style
I personally prefer no antes, however if they are there it's not a problem as long as the whole schedule is cohesive.
I don't know what to do here. Â I play in 2 leagues and never seem to like how points are distributed. Â Maybe add 10% of the money winnings to the top 5 in points. Â ie. Â win $40 gets you 4 bonus points. Â
This is a fair way to do it in my opinion
some 7 card stud would be good. Â And I would like to try my hand at omaha but I already know I suck at it
I'd prefer having to bust out to rebuy. Â Makes it less advantageous. Â I also think the rebuy should only be for the starting amount of chips. Â The rebuy period isn't long enough that you are at that big of a disadvantage after rebuying, and you definitely shouldn't have an advantage.
Who's going to argue with the master here?
As we discussed privately a few months ago, I would favor going to a "Nascar" style points system.
The current "waiting list" is to easy to abuse. Â I also think the current system favors those (like me) who are on the net constantly. Â People without work access to the forum are usually left in the dust. Â As far as a suggestion, I can only think of 1 that seems plausible, and thats a draw/lottery. Â Allow a 24-36 hour window for signups, and then randomly order them into the 32 who are playing, and a random waiting list. Â Anyone who is more than a day late is out of luck and starts at the bottom of the waiting list (and might as well make other plans
I like the "Classic" playing Hold'em exclusively. Â We still get other opportunities to play other games at your "Casual Fridays" which I really enjoy, but I'd leave the "league" alone.
I think top 4 makes sense. Â However, whatever points system you end up using, what if certain seats were reserved for "overall". Â This year you had 8 seats go to overall. Â Instead, you could have 2 for "top 4 scores", 2 for overall, and 2 for top money winners (which leaves a few seats unaccounted for
I think the buy-in is fine since this is your "target market". Â You probably wouldn't want to raise it more than double your buy-in (which I'd consider $20-$30 depending on rebuys), so somewhere between $40-$60 makes sense.
I like this idea, and I don't think it would be considered a rake, since it is all going into the prize pool, and everyone has an equal chance to qualify/win it. Â The prize pool just happens to be paid out on a different night.
My reaction to this is kind of the same thing you were mentioning at the beginning. Will people feel forced to always take an initial rebuy to start the tournament?
I guess one way around that it to alter the buy-in/rebuy/add-on formula, by decreasing certains buy-ins.... For example..
$5 Buy-in for $1,000 chips, $5 Re-Buy at or lower than $1,000 (so people could take an immediate rebuy - $10 for $2000 chips.) One add-on for $5 after level 4, $5 for $2,000.?? This might be interesting. Thoughts?
We have a number of issues here... 1) We need to get through 32 players in roughly 5 hours. 2) "Seasonsed" players are naturally tight, so regardless how you structure the blinds, players will always end up in a postion that they feel shortstacked. Any suggestions on an improvement to the blind schedule would be wonderful!!!
Here's a possible suggestion...
Current Schedule: 25/50, 50/100, 75/150, 100/200, 100/200(25), 150/300(50), 200/400(50), 300/600(75), 400/800(100), 600/1,200(100), 800/1,600(200), 1,000/2,000(300), 1,500/3,000(500), 2,000/4,000(500), 3,000/6,000(1,000)
Where can we add extra levels, and which *other* levels should we take out to compensate? Perhaps adding in both a 25/25 and a 50/75 level to the beginning would work, with the end of the rebuys happening just before the 75/150 level?
Another suggestion would be 2 decks per table to increase the speed of the deals.
I like the rebuys at 500 or less. A rebuy that is available immediately is just another word for addon. I'm with Beanie and don't like addons, it is almost a penalty to making to the end of the rebuy period. Simple is the best system.
Love this idea. Generally use it in all of my games, however I am usually also limited to one table, hence it is a whole lot less expensive. Just have the person who dealt last responsible for a quick shuffle of the cards during the hand (or someone not in the hand can also take that duty). Gets the hand rate up which increases the amount of play without adding any time.
I like the idea of 2 decks, since I suck at shuffling. It would defiantly speed up the play.
Johnnie
If the event was purely a freeze-out, it's highly likely that we wouldn't have 32 players left in the tournament by the fifth level, hence increasing the M of the average player. I think for the first one next year, I may try this to see what happens.
From previous numbers, the average buy-in is $20 for an average chip-stack of $5000. So that might be a good number to go with. (or keep the $2500 and add a few smaller levels.
I think I'm settled.. for the first couple Bristol's next year we'll run $20 freezeouts to see what people think.
_________________________________________________
Thoughts on g2's points: What you're doing seems to award points on a exponential scale as players who place high earn more and more points for more and more things. I'd like to see a side by side comparision between your forumla and the one posted above. (points = sqr(weight) * (10 * sqr(# of players) / sqr(rank) - 9))
I'm willing to bet you'll find them very, very simliar.
_________________________________________________
Thoughts on g2's shedule: That's the original Bristol Street schedule for a starting count of 1,000. It's a tried and true schedule that works well. You will come to regreat having two formal chip ups during the game. (ie. I know there are a lot of greens on the table when we hit the 400-800(100) level but a) it's FANTASTIC to be able to chip 25's to 500 and it's FANTASIC that I only have to do two tables of chip racing, instead of 4! LOVE IT.
Having said that... can't wait to play!! I love hosting, but the occational game where I get to focus on the game is a blast too.
_________________________________________________
Thoughts on points. Using the forumla, here are the "points payouts" for a field of 32... I kinda like it. Big rewards in the final table. Gradual for the rest. Whaddaya think?
1 - 57
2 - 40
3 - 33
4 - 29
5 - 26
6 - 24
7 - 22
8 - 20
9 - 19
10 - 18
11 - 18
12 - 17
13 - 16
14 - 16
15 - 15
16 - 15
17 - 14
18 - 14
19 - 13
20 - 13
21 - 13
22 - 13
23 - 12
24 - 12
25 - 12
26 - 12
27 - 11
28 - 11
29 - 11
30 - 11
31 - 11
32 - 10
Can't Wait!!
JohnnieH
I like your proposed point system as well.