Royal Cup Suggestions
I thought I would put a thread in for any suggestions for the future.
My biggest comment was I felt 10 points for each heads up match was a little much. I thought maybe it should be 5 points only. My reasoning would be the teams played very hard for every point up until the HU. Those team points, for 3 tournaments, should be worth more than the total of the last HU matches. After all we were playing as a team.
The example is that each team had an average of 30 to 40 points for each of the first three tournaments. Why should the last tournament be weighted so much. If they only win half of the games they get 40 and all they get 80. IMO thats too much for HU.
My biggest comment was I felt 10 points for each heads up match was a little much. I thought maybe it should be 5 points only. My reasoning would be the teams played very hard for every point up until the HU. Those team points, for 3 tournaments, should be worth more than the total of the last HU matches. After all we were playing as a team.
The example is that each team had an average of 30 to 40 points for each of the first three tournaments. Why should the last tournament be weighted so much. If they only win half of the games they get 40 and all they get 80. IMO thats too much for HU.
Comments
I originally figured the heads up matches would be worth 5 points each, but now that I think about it, at 10 points per match that gives an average of only 40 points per team.Â
Based on 10 teams, one idea I had was to split the field into the top 5 teams and the bottom 5 teams after the 3 tourneys. This way players in the top half were only playing against other players whose teams were in contention for the title / money. Sure it could get a little complicated for seating... but we have proven time and again that as a group we can handle the challenges thrown at us (Sandro, Miranda, Jeff, etc. U ROCK!). Any thoughts???
/g2
I also think it was a good decision to uncap the blinds HU after Shannon's marathon Stud match. Â If there is a cap, it should be higher, to keep things moving. Â However, when we uncapped things, the jump during NL from 1000/2000 to 2000/4000 was too steep - maybe have a 1500/3000. Â I didn't mind it (since I was big stack), but it definately eliminates a lot of room for movement for the smaller stack.
Also, I think the breaks need to be 10 minutes. Â We were running pretty long, so I understand shortening things. Â But with 1 washroom, 5 minutes isn't enough time even if you don't smoke (and if you do, get ready to blind out a few hands).
Other than those tweaks, I do think the suggestion (from "Milton" Dave) to have a BBQ for dinner was good. Â Give us forumers some time to get to know each other away from the table, and with the next one planned for summer, the weather will be more cooperative (I hope).
Personally I think 10 points for the HU matches was the perfect number, since making it only 5 would make the HU portion virtually meaningless, and any more
than 10 would place too much emphasis on the individual matches (as you said)
Going into the HU section, we had a lead of 11 points, which meant any team that could catch us would have to win 2 matches more than we did, but if these
matches were only 5 points, that turns into a 3 match deficit. 3rd place was 18 points back so they would have to win 4 more to overtake us, so even if we only
win half (average) the games they have to go 8-0 to have a shot.
With the HU points at 10 per victory, I think that gave all the top 4 teams a legitimate shot at winning the tournament, but with any less it would be over
before the HU even started.
As a side note I'd say that if the average team score for the SNG part was actually 30-40, then a HU score in the 5-8 point range would be much more reasonable
to stay consistant with the rest of the day.
I know the biggest delay at the start was caused by the captains trying to place their players into the SNGS, and
this was a bit of a pain to try to do while playing. Obviously in this case with the changes that happened over the
last few days this was unavoidable, but maybe for the next one if we can't do this ahead of time we could have a
captains meeting an hour before the tournament to at least schedule the first 2 rounds (and then the other 2 could
be done over the dinner break)
At first I liked this idea, but if you're going to have 10 teams, there is a very good chance that a team in 6th could have a good run HU
and move up into 3rd place if not better (aka the money). Yesterday there were 4 teams that all had a shot heading into the HU,
and I haven't looked over the scores too closely, but I'm sure it would have been possible for the other teams to jump into 3rd place
with the right results in the HU matches.
I think if you're going to split the field for the HU matches then it would be hard to exclude a team from the bottom half if they jumped
into the money placings, and I'm also sure the teams in the top half wouldn't be too happy with that.
Maybe have a more formal way of signing up? When this first started, there was only room for 1 "toronto" team....by the time I read the thread, that team was already full. I think there will probably be a lot of interest in the summer tournement...it's probably a good idea to figure out max # of teams, and how to facilitate team selection.
I'd love to play next time, and would also be willing to help organize.
Plus we need to really think about the blind levels for 7 card stud since all the Omaha games were finished before any of the stud games, leaving even the winners of Omaha to hang out in the losers lounge.
All in all the day was great, had tons of fun and what better way to end a day than with a heads up match that decided who busted on the bubble.
Milton Did F'n Rock
Actually Eleanor, I was considering entering Ching Hill League as a team in the next Ryder. I'll keep you posted.
AJ
Sweet.
I think that would be a great idea, may be tough to accomplish, since we would still need 2 games played at once to make the day run smoothly, thus we'd still be forced to choose which game we played in.
eg. 4 tables of stud and 4 tables of limit hold emrun at the same time
  4 tables PL omaha and 4 tables NL holdem run at the same time
Next option make it multi day, or start at 7 am
Wasn't this cancelled?
That is actually a good idea. It would just take a little organizing on the team captains side to ensure the same people don't always face each other. I have faith in my captain!
Personally, I'm NOT for this idea. I would prefer to play in both the Limit and No Limit games, and I'm sure alot of others would have also have a tough time deciding which game to play if they were separated. If anything, I think we should start the day sooner, get the Omaha and Stud out of the way before noon, THEN a round of Limit, THEN the NL. My POV.
I would imagine that most of the teams would still be based around a general area, but I think that it would make it a much fiercer contest (I mean, we say we're there for the fun, but whens the last time a poker player told the truth?) and there would probably be less last minute since the captains should personally know each member of their team. I had a really difficult time trying to place my players due to the lack of experience I had with them.
We would probably need a bigger room though.
Perhaps we could look at the Legion on York Rd. in Guelph, right on HWY 7, and the out-of-towner's wouldn't have to do much city driving.
Does anyone know what that place costs, or anyone who can get us in there? Or a better suggestion?
I also second the
real pain trying to play and place.
1) Added 1 1/2 hours to the day - the Captains picking positions - This is a big part of the game the match ups of the team (true spirit of the Ryder Cup of Golf). My intention was to get this done prior to the day starting but we went from 10 teams to 6 back to 8 then finishing at 7 within the last week. There was much work by myself and Jeff to get this to happen at all as well as the Captains that kept their teams together.
2) Added 1 1/2 hours The Stud factor(45 mins in final Stud HU match as well as probably 45 mins from completion of the omha SNGs).The blind levels I think were fair and I did originally cap them to ensure that play not blinds would decide the final 3 positions in the SNGs. If the current format continues there will be some modifications to time 15 or 17 mins (saves 30 to 45 mins) and starting chips for the stud game will be reduced. That was my fear from day 1 and it was confirmed Saturday. The breaks were well over 10 mins long regardless of what was on the tournament clock. I have already worked out a solution to making the colour up more efficient as well as the transition between disciplines.
3) The point system as it is I think is what added to the excitement of the HU portion and the tournament as a whole. There were 4 teams fighting hard for the top 3 positions and I believe a 5 pt HU game would limit this excitment and render the HU portion useless. The Ryder in golf has a heads up component on the final day and that is where legends are made and tournaments are ususally decided. If you look at the points accumulated only one team did not get at least 4 or 5 HU victories. So it is not as much of a deciding factor as first thought but I think it is an important aspect of the CUP. So I would have a very hard time changing this but again this is OUR tournament so my eyes and ears are open. I am also glad that Pinhead backed this system.
4) Tournament size/team structure - This will be dependent on player interest and venue location. If we exceed 8 teams then a new venue is needed. Ideally this will never go past 10 teams for the short term at least. This being said the top 6 teams from saturday will have spots secure for Royal Cup II and I think we will always use a criteria to relegate 1 or 2 bottom teams to qualification rounds if need be. In a 8 to 10 team event we will relegate the bottom 2 teams.
Also we will have to analyze the teams further in the future as this will remain a regional setup (City/County) as this is another exciting factor to the tournament. For the most part this was in place on Saturday except for a few cross overs (Milton has a big suburb). Just so everyone knows I agreed to g2 playing for Milton he tried hard to get a team going and I felt he was more then deserved a chance to play in the Cup. I do not think anyone would argue against my decision. In the future I think the captains will need to discuss firm boundaries for their team selections.
I hope not, since part of the enjoyment is playing each of the other teams, and if the tournament gets too big, that wouldn't be possible. Â If enough players/teams are interested, I'd rather see a few "mini-Cups" with the top teams advancing to a joint Cup, but I wouldn't want to see a single day with more than 10 teams.
And Sandro, you are entitled to take a few days off before planning the next one
One suggestion I had well falling asleep watching the Stud marathon is perhaps a time limit. If the game is geared to run 2.5 hours give it a limit of 3.5 hours, I like the idea of a cap to allow play to decide the match rather then blinds but at the time limit split the points for 1st and second giving chip lead the extra. No offense but the two players in the stud final put the entire day back 45 minutes all for 3 points, if first was 15 and second 12 then give chip lead 14 and second 13 and end the game.
Also, some structure to dealing I think is in order, I found it pretty annoying to have certain team members running around trying to deal when it became headsup with someone else from their own team. I think if people want to help out and deal that is great but I think they should not be from a team that has a person currently still playing.
Aside from starting very late and being pushed back further by the stud games it was very well run and a definite success! I like the idea of having multiple disciplines, I too would like to have played stud and Omaha but would not want to give up on limit or nl hold'em....I think if we started a bit earlier and tweaked the starting stacks and blinds we could all play all 4 games as well as heads-up? Perhaps having two decks going for stud and Omaha would help move things along as well?
Anyways great job to all the organizers involved!!!!!!!!!!!
2nd, I think that all teams that came out should automatically have an invite back.
If there is a high demand to add extra teams by Royal Cup II then we should have a Ladder style tournament style ( dropping 3 teams and adding 3 teams that qualify)
I completely understand if you want to keep your postition, and it is your right, but it may take a load off your back.
stp
We could always do a NPL (National Poker League) where Team GM's draft Forum Members for a similiar tourney but with it all
mixed...there's yet another tourney you guys could run...
A) Stud Hold em Omaha stud Eight or better (Hi/Lo) (SHOE)
C) Hold em Omaha Razz Stud omaha Eight or better (hi/lo) (Horse)
Of course these would all be limit games.
This would also cut down on total events by one (notice FLHE in each of these) opening the door for another event (Rochambeau?), or longer breaks.
I will pretend that I didn't just read that.
This is a suggestion thread, and it was a suggestion.
For every 100 bad ideas, there is a good one, and the good ones make progress.
If you don't lke that one, chalk it up to the law of averages.
I mean, what if you thought it was a good one, but didn't think of it yourself. Then you'd be happy.
Sorry if I offended you.