Not signed in (Sign In)
Welcome Guest!
Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    •  
      CommentAuthorwamplerr
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2005
     

    I really dislike the payouts here. 2000 entries in the $1500 NL event,

    top 200 get paid. I don't mind the top 10% getting paid, and if I were

    in charge I would actually pay more spots.

    What I don't like is structure of their payout ladder. My guess is

    they are doing it for simplicity.

    171 through 200 paid the same amount, $1,945

    Next 30 spots paid $2,220

    Next 30 spots paid $2,500

    $2,780 for the next 9

    $3,055 for the next 9

    $3,470 for the next 9

    $4,165 for the next 9

    $4,860 for 64-72

    $5,555 for 55-63

    $6,530 for 46-54

    $8,055 for 37-45

    $9,725 for 28-36

    $13,890 for 19-27

    Here's the payout once you make the final two tables:

    1 $611,145

    2 $329,975

    3 $202,790

    4 $175,010

    5 $147,230

    6 $119,450

    7 $91,670

    8 $63,895

    9 $47,225

    10 $30,555

    11 $30,555

    12 $30,555

    13 $25,000

    14 $25,000

    15 $25,000

    16 $19,445

    17 $19,445

    18 $19,445

    I think there are three groups of tournament players that can live in

    harmony. Dead money, who is here to have fun (or they think they are

    here to make money), EV Maximizers (who are here for the money), and

    Players who want to win at all-costs (PWWTWAC).

    The EV Maximizers gain money (by definition) from the PWWTWAC, who go

    broke in situations that hurt their tournament equity in order to

    maximize their chance of winning. This is fine for both groups. The

    PWWTWAC's want the bracelets, endorsements, and camera time, the EV

    maximizers want the money. Both come out ahead due to the Dead Money

    group, and everyone is happy.

    The structure in place really forces the EV Maximizers to play for the

    win at many times throughout the tournament. Once you make the money

    (or even if you are 100 spots away from the money), the correct

    strategy is usually to gamble, because the ladder doesn't really move

    up anyway.

    Imagine you make the money with a stack that is about half the average,

    but you are still comfortable with the blinds and antes (let's say you

    have 20 big blinds). You don't get another pay jump unless you

    outlasts 30 people, so you can't let yourself blind away. If you

    manage to break even during the level, you will hit a very slight pay

    jump, and you will again be at a point where you have to wait another

    30 spots for any incentive, so you'll need to gamble there. Once you

    make the money, you are really forced to try and build a stack. But in

    a tournament, you should only be forced to gamble by the blinds, never

    by the payout. The payout should have an incentive built in for

    survival, so the grinders gain at the expense of most of the gamblers,

    and so that a few of the gamblers can steal their way to the chip lead.

    I just don't any incentive here.

    It is ok if finisher number 2000 gets paid the same amount as finisher

    201, that is a fact of tournament poker. But there is no way that

    finisher 171 should get paid as much as 200, and no way spot 100 should

    pay in the same neighborhood as spot 200.

    Here is the WamplerR modification on this 200 person payout. I'm not

    going to put a ton of time into it, so the numbers might not add up

    completely, but it's my generality of an ideal payout. There

    definately are no blocks of 30 spots getting the same payout. Every

    time a player is eliminated, a player that survives should gain (or be

    very close to gaining).

    Starting from the top:

    Old payout:

    1 $611,145

    2 $329,975

    3 $202,790

    4 $175,010

    5 $147,230

    6 $119,450

    7 $91,670

    8 $63,895

    9 $47,225

    New payout:

    1 $500,000

    2 $300,000

    3 $185,000

    4 $155,000

    5 $125,000

    6 $100,000

    7 $80,000

    8 $65,000

    9 $50,000

    Think about it like this. Imagine all nine players started with even

    chips. If ninth gets $50k, and first is about 8 times more difficult

    to achieve than last, should first really get paid 13 times as much?

    Half the time, I expect to make the top 5, so fifth should pay about

    twice as much as 9th.

    Old payout:

    10 $30,555

    11 $30,555

    12 $30,555

    13 $25,000

    14 $25,000

    15 $25,000

    16 $19,445

    17 $19,445

    18 $19,445

    New payout:

    10 $32,000

    11 $30,000

    12 $28,000

    13 $26,000

    14 $24,000

    15 $22,000

    16 $20,000

    17 $18,000

    18 $16,000

    Crazy to be this deep in the tournament, and not to gain each time a

    player is eliminated. The top 18 is getting paid about $238k less

    under my payout.

    Now starting from the bottom.

    Old payout:

    171 through 200 paid the same amount, $1,945

    Next 30 spots paid $2,220

    Next 30 spots paid $2,500

    $2,780 for the next 9

    $3,055 for the next 9

    $3,470 for the next 9

    $4,165 for the next 9

    $4,860 for 64-72

    $5,555 for 55-63

    $6,530 for 46-54

    $8,055 for 37-45

    $9,725 for 28-36

    $13,890 for 19-27

    I don't mind paying a block of 10 people the same amount for 101-200,

    but blocks of 30 people are crazy. So I would just take some averages

    and make linear increases every 10 spots.

    191-200 $2,000

    181-190 $2,100

    171-180 $2,200

    161-170 $2,300

    151-160 $2,450

    141-150 $2,600

    131-140 $2,750

    121-130 $3,000

    111-120 $3,250

    101-110 $3,500

    The old system paid $228k out to these 100 spots, my system pays $262k.

    Now for 100 up until the final two tables.

    Old system:

    $3,055 for 100-91

    $3,470 for 90-82

    $4,165 for 73-81

    $4,860 for 64-72

    $5,555 for 55-63

    $6,530 for 46-54

    $8,055 for 37-45

    $9,725 for 28-36

    $13,890 for 19-27

    New system:

    100 $3,550

    99 $3,600

    98 $3,650

    97 $3,700

    96 $3,750

    95 $3,800

    94 $3,850

    93 $3,900

    92 $3,950

    91 $4,000

    90 $4,050

    89 $4,100

    88 $4,150

    87 $4,200

    86 $4,250

    85 $4,300

    84 $4,350

    83 $4,400

    82 $4,450

    81 $4,500

    80 $4,550

    79 $4,600

    78 $4,650

    77 $4,700

    76 $4,750

    75 $4,800

    74 $4,850

    73 $4,900

    72 $4,950

    71 $5,000

    70 $5,100

    69 $5,200

    68 $5,300

    67 $5,400

    66 $5,500

    65 $5,600

    64 $5,700

    63 $5,800

    62 $5,900

    61 $6,000

    60 $6,100

    59 $6,200

    58 $6,300

    57 $6,400

    56 $6,500

    55 $6,600

    54 $6,700

    53 $6,800

    52 $6,900

    51 $7,000

    50 $7,150

    49 $7,300

    48 $7,450

    47 $7,600

    46 $7,750

    45 $7,900

    44 $8,050

    43 $8,200

    42 $8,350

    41 $8,500

    40 $8,700

    39 $8,900

    38 $9,100

    37 $9,300

    36 $9,500

    35 $9,700

    34 $9,900

    33 $10,100

    32 $10,300

    31 $10,500

    30 $10,700

    29 $10,900

    28 $11,100

    27 $11,400

    26 $11,700

    25 $12,000

    24 $12,400

    23 $12,800

    22 $13,200

    21 $13,700

    20 $14,200

    19 $15,000

    Old system paid out $534k to these spots, my system pays $573k.

    My payout still has about $165k to give out, but I don't feel like

    changing any numbers. Maybe give it to the top 3, or maybe pay an

    extra 50 people with it.

    Either way, I'm willing to bet that a random sample of 50 WSOP players

    would vote for my payout over the payout that actually occurred. I

    should note, that I don't dislike Harrah's payout as badly as I've

    disliked many payouts in the past, so I think they are on the right

    track.

    •  
      CommentAuthorhdouble
    • CommentTimeJun 23rd 2005
     

    I couldn't agree more, especially since most of the final tables have had the majority of players holding less than 20 big bets. The super top-heavy payouts and relatively short stack sizes make gambling for first the max EV play.

  1. 728x890_us
    •  
      CommentAuthorBroadsword
    • CommentTimeJun 24th 2005
     

    I think that the present payout structure for the top ten percent of the field is correct and flattened enough...

  2.  

    Very nice thread wamplerr. I agree with you 100%