Just found this - looks like a wheel

    • FoolsGold
      FoolsGold
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.02.2007 Posts: 7
      Poker is said to be the one casino game that the punter can get ahead of.

      All other casino games are rigged in the house's favour, however I think I spy the 'rig' in online poker...

      After 4 years, it's just dawned on me why 90% of online poker players go broke chasing rainbows. All these poker sites with bonus this bonus that, satallite this etc... meanwhile let's look at tourny payout structures...

      Last night on Titan I pay $3 to play a freezeout with 577 players. I finaly get to the last 60 and I reach the money, how much? $2.68. So far it's cost me 62c to be in the top 11% of players.

      I finaly finish 17th for $14 after 3.5 hours. Whoopee I win $10.70 for 3.5 hours work.

      How about we apply the law of pot odds here?

      If I put myself in the top 10% of poker players, (yep that's high), I would place on average, 58th in this tourney and LOSE 62c!

      That's a worthless calculation, so let's dream I can be in the top 5% of poker players, (feeling giddy now), I would place 29th in this tourney on average, winning about $4.60 profit.

      Therefore I would have to reach this extreme potential twice every 3 tourneys in order to BREAK EVEN!

      To my previous point, every poker site has this wild payout structure, 60% to the winner, 40% + 20% to the runners-up and scr*w everyone else. Why are no sites offering a fairer payout structure?

      What's wrong with 25% for the win, 20% runner-up and the 55% left overs spread amongst the 3rd-30th places? This would make a 30th place worth more than the $14 I won from placing 14th and reward lots more people for their efforts.

      If 90% of poker players are finishing outside this elite top 3, they are fighting a losing battle at these payout structures.

      Yes, some people make big profits, 3 out of 577 to be exact, thats 0.5% of the poker population - do we see the suck-in?

      Reasons for all sites having the same structure? Obvious - it's a structure that keeps the punter coming back, scraping away feeling good about breaking even, all the time taking 3 steps forward and 4 back. Keep chasing your rainbow people, whilst they benefit from mass turnovers.

      I don't see the need for it, these payout structures are taken as second nature, but that is BS. If a site could find an advantage in sharing prizemoney more equally, they would. They don't because this is how they turn the tables on a game they can't otherwise control or profit from.

      The odds are NOT in the punters favour under these conditions.
  • 6 replies
    • Stefan1000
      Stefan1000
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.01.2006 Posts: 1,649
      Ok just a simple question.

      Why don't you play on Party?

      http://www.partypoker.com/tournaments/types_tournament/multi_table/payout_structure.html

      Lets say you are playing a $11 tournament with also 577 participants. The pricepool would be (minus $1 for every player rake) $5770.

      When you would place as 60th you would get 0.37% $21.35

      Also the 25% you suggested for the first place are almost paid out there.

      Just a reminder: Tournaments with a low buy-in very often have bad payout structeres because of the high rake. That is also the reason why we suggest to start with $11 SnG's and not the $3 or $6 SnG's.

      And you really don't want to compare roulette with poker???
      I mean we don't have to talk about that, do we?

      Anyway according to my epxerience earning regular winnings by only playing Tournaments is probably the hardest way to earn money with poker. Not because of the payout or rake structure just because tournament play needs so much experience...

      Best regards,
      Stefan

      PS.: It would be cool if you would accept our board rules!
    • FoolsGold
      FoolsGold
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.02.2007 Posts: 7
      Tx for reply, I did read the board rules, sorry if I let a name slip in, it was irrelevant as 90% of payout structues are similar. I hope the post was not pointless either. I wasn't allowed access to tourney threads, (silver reqd).

      As mainly a tourny player, I often find that general stratigic ideas and accepted theory do not apply so much to tournies. It is hard to find useful articles on the subject. As you say there is a large skill factor, although there is also a large 'donk' factor, and IMO it's the sheer weight of donk players that eventualy bring you down.

      I note your advice on playing higher entry fees, although this is no sure way to success either, there are almost as many people willing to 'blow $10 in a lunch-hour as there are $2'. It's maddening trying to escape the casual poker crowd - how do you rate someones starting hands when they are quite possibly grabbing a game befoe dinner, or whilst watching their fav TV progamme, are eady to go all-in because it's time to go out etc...


      I would love to read more on tourny strategy, but from obscure angles, such as, Do implied odds take on greater significance when you are trying to score chips in lumps, as opposed to a cashgame mindset which says 'any won pot is a good pot'?

      For instance, you hit 2 pair on the flop, there is little in the pot, but 4 players have limped in. Cashgame strategy says bet potsize+ and take the pot down, no free cards etc. But in a tourney this has to be a bad play, you have a good flop, and potential for the nuts, you have to build the pot up and execute the moves later IMO. The implied odds are huge, up to 70/1, whereas taking the small pot is useless in the tourney context and a waste of good cards, better to lose 200 coaxing people in than taking away the 80 chips on offer.

      It's difficult sometimes segregating strategy for cash/tourney/limit/ etc as each strategy has its' own place dependant on the game being played right? You could be reading a strategy for limit and assume it applies to no-limit when it's actualy the wrong play.

      I'd like to discover more unorthadox methods for tourny play and after 4 years play I feel I am getting there, I am just saying that the odds are against you in the long run, but the jackpot is there to be hit, and for me, tourny play will always be the essence of poker. It's a painful road sometimes.
    • beerthababe
      beerthababe
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.12.2006 Posts: 146
      I wouldnt give a freecard holding only a 2pair and 4 limpers, its way to big chance that somebody hit their gutshot or set or whatever. Better to bet and hope somebody has some kind of draw or overcard.
    • Stefan1000
      Stefan1000
      Bronze
      Joined: 24.01.2006 Posts: 1,649
      I am not a great expert about tourney play but i know our content team is working on a special tournament area at the moment.

      Best regards,
      Stefan
    • sismis
      sismis
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.10.2006 Posts: 352

      For instance, you hit 2 pair on the flop, there is little in the pot, but 4 players have limped in. Cashgame strategy says bet potsize+ and take the pot down, no free cards etc. But in a tourney this has to be a bad play, you have a good flop, and potential for the nuts, you have to build the pot up and execute the moves later IMO. The implied odds are huge, up to 70/1, whereas taking the small pot is useless in the tourney context and a waste of good cards, better to lose 200 coaxing people in than taking away the 80 chips on offer.
      with your experience you probably know this and much more...
      early stages of tournament should be played just like cash game so you should take pot down(if its very tiny pot against 1 or 2 opponents then you bet less on flop so pot can grow) and later when blinds are big you should slowplay it. but ofc you must be careful that the board is not very dangerous and that you dont have low 2pair.
      "harrington on holdem vol 1-3" are good books about tourneys.
    • bl1nd
      bl1nd
      Global
      Joined: 07.03.2007 Posts: 30
      Tourneys is all about shifting playing styles from super tight to loose agressive... in the first levels play tight let ppl eliminate each other only play premium hands and try to slowplay and trap ppl... after that ppl start getting tight and u should come in to steal pots... when u feel confident with your stack start playing tight...

      Foolsgold the fact is that at least 80% of the ppl that participate in those low buy in tournaments suck and dont have any play strategy... things get though when u gotta fight that 20% of good players...