WPT Satelittes at Bristol St. Part 3

Zithal

My games are casual and fun, and I thought it'd be nice to have the whole group playing along. The winner, giving a portion of themselves back to the players they competed with, gives everyone a buy-in to the sat winner's success. That said, some people may not like doing this, so I'd like to hear your thoughts.

With 32 players, 1% gives up almost a third of yourself, while 1/4% is 8% total, 1/2% is 16% total.

(PS. Sorry for the multiple posts.. it'd be easier if we could have multiple polls in one thread.)

beanie42

If you set the % but make it non-compulsory, players could opt in/out prior to the satellite. If players ABC opt in, and DE opt out, than if DE win, no % is shared, but if ABC win, the % is shared only between those players.

Basically, those just wanting to play can, but some friends can choose to share pieces. I wouldn't make the % part of the satellite structure, just let the players handle it themselves as a sidebet (similar to the Triple Crown).

stpboy

I would make it compulsary but make the percentages more like tournament structure winnings.  Where (if the winner made $100,000):

26-32nd place get .002%  ($200)
18th- 25th place get .005% ($500)
11th-17th place get .0075%  ($750)
10th .008%  ($800)
9th .009%  ($900)
8th .01%  ($1000)
7th .011%  ($1100)
6th .012%  ($1200)
5th .013%  ($1300)
4th .014%  ($1400)
3rd .0175% ($1750)
2nd .025%  ($2500)
1st 

This adds up to $22550 but is really just an example of how it could work out.  I'd like to see the total percentages work out to be between 20-25%, leaning more towards 20% though.  Yes I do realize that the person, it they won, would actually win a heck of a lot more then 100K.

stp

Lamb_of_john

great ideas rob, and i'm donw for playing them without question.

perhaps a list of people interested so we can all see where the interest is here?

Johnny

oh yeah, i liek shannon's idea too.

BrennerM

I vote for Shannon's idea or some variation of it (variable percentage depending on placement in satellite).

Ranger Mike

GTA Poker

stpboy wrote:

I would make it compulsary but make the percentages more like tournament structure winnings. Where (if the winner made $100,000):

26-32nd place get .002% ($200)
18th- 25th place get .005% ($500)
11th-17th place get .0075% ($750)
10th .008% ($800)
9th .009% ($900)
8th .01% ($1000)
7th .011% ($1100)
6th .012% ($1200)
5th .013% ($1300)
4th .014% ($1400)
3rd .0175% ($1750)
2nd .025% ($2500)
1st

This adds up to $22550 but is really just an example of how it could work out. I'd like to see the total percentages work out to be between 20-25%, leaning more towards 20% though. Yes I do realize that the person, it they won, would actually win a heck of a lot more then 100K.

stp

How is 0.25% of $100000 = $2500 it would be $25

pokerdro

I would go with Shannons method.

g2

GTA Poker wrote:

stpboy wrote:

I would make it compulsary but make the percentages more like tournament structure winnings. Where (if the winner made $100,000):

26-32nd place get .002% ($200)
18th- 25th place get .005% ($500)
11th-17th place get .0075% ($750)
10th .008% ($800)
9th .009% ($900)
8th .01% ($1000)
7th .011% ($1100)
6th .012% ($1200)
5th .013% ($1300)
4th .014% ($1400)
3rd .0175% ($1750)
2nd .025% ($2500)
1st

This adds up to $22550 but is really just an example of how it could work out. I'd like to see the total percentages work out to be between 20-25%, leaning more towards 20% though. Yes I do realize that the person, it they won, would actually win a heck of a lot more then 100K.

stp

How is 0.25% of $100000 = $2500 it would be $25

0.25% of $100000 = $250

0.025% of $100000 = $25

You're both wrong. I'm guessing Shannon meant 2.5%, which equals 0.025 x $100000 = $2500.

/g2