How big should a mincash be?
Should it be double your buy-in, more or less? Mincashing is rarely debated but it makes a difference to a lot of players.
A bizarre story this week from the online bracelet series at WSOP.com where a $7,777 High Roller paid the mincash just $7,797.48, a mere $20 profit on one of the biggest buy-ins you’re ever likely to pay online.
Without a doubt one of the worst payout structures I have ever seen. pic.twitter.com/b8f0G9MB4x
— Ryan LaplanteðŸ³ï¸ðŸŒˆ (@Protentialmn) July 26, 2021
We often argue about payout structures in poker but that is usually reserved for the final table, where the most money is. It’s not often that mincashes are the subject for debate, they tend to follow a rule of between about 1.5 and 2.5 times your initial buy-in.
This tournament in particular seems ludicrous given it’s a High Roller. I think it would have caught less flak if it literally just gave the players their exact buy-in back. A $20 profit in a nosebleed tournament seems laughable.
A balancing act
When you pay more money for a mincash, or indeed pay more players in the field, there is a balancing act to be done. You want to make those who made the money feel rewarded for their time, especially if there are a lot of satellite entries for whom the mincash really means something.
But reward them too generously and you take away money from the final table, which is ultimately what everyone is there for. Most players accept that mincashes can’t be huge for this reason.
How much should the first min cash be? Obviously we are acknowledging that a small min cash means bigger prizes later on and vice versa
— Barry Carter (@Barry_Carter) July 26, 2021
If you satellited in, any mincash is welcome, given the buy-in you played is probably an amount of money you are happy winning. The players most happy with a ‘buy-in back’ mincash are probably satellite entries rather than professionals who want a top heavy payout structure. The PSPC had this type of mincash, but it was voted on by the players and made sense given over 300 of them qualified for free, it meant more players cashed.
For a lot of people mincashing is just a way of reducing variance while they try and get to a final table. This is why the trend of 1.5-1.7 times mincashes seems to be popular. It’s less about the ROI and more about just not losing your buy-in.
Everyone prefers flatter payouts
In general I am in favour of flatter payouts across the board in tournaments. Most MTTs end in a deal at the final table and many probably would end in chops before the final table if there wasn’t such a stigma around it.
A lot of people will publicly say mincashes should be smaller so the final table pays more, then go on to do a chop when they get to the final table.
For that reason I think a mincash where you literally double your money is best. Doubling your stake always sounds quite good and it’s a huge deal for anyone who has satellited into the tournament. However, I appreciate why paying more people with a lower mincash makes sense for a field with lots of satellite entries like the PSPC or Main Event.
How big should a mincash be? Let us know in the comments:
