Poker Forum > Live Poker
Cash Tour - Leg 2 - Cardiff - Tournament Format
s4ooter:
--- Quote from: dwh103 on July 31, 2013, 19:43:02 PM ---
A few people thought it was too shallow last time - adding straddles will just exacerbate this. Disappointed that this has been added without any real call for it (going by the feedback/suggestion thread), whilst nothing has changed in respect of depth/reloads.
"Leading stacks" presumably refers to largest stacks and not most profitable stacks? If so, still the wrong way around imo.
--- End quote ---
+1
The straddle idea will make the game shallower, and im pretty sure wasnt greatly received in the suggestion thread. The main problem is the depth of the games, so not sure why we have gone from 2 x £50, to 4 x £50 and then back again....
We may look like we are having a moan, but i know for myself this is my favourite format of all the APAT events, so would love to see it work the right way. :)
MintTrav:
I don"t like the concept of allowing players to take more than one buy-in at a time, especially if they lose any chance of buying in again. It takes some of the skill out of the game and makes it just a tournament. The last one was a tournament by another name and this looks like being the same. Make them lose a lot of their chips before they can top up, or at least put a time barrier, before which they can"t top up.
And lose the straddles.
SirPercival:
Are we likely to get any response on this tonight?
I have a lot to sort out if this stays as it is. With the straddle, the shorter stack, the 4x increase in rake*, I don"t think I will play.
* was £200+£5, now £100+£10
Edit: just read the OP again. The rake has only doubled, not 4x as £5 of the £10 is the champions fee.
s4ooter:
--- Quote from: MintTrav on July 31, 2013, 20:26:27 PM ---
I don"t like the concept of allowing players to take more than one buy-in at a time, especially if they lose any chance of buying in again. It takes some of the skill out of the game and makes it just a tournament. The last one was a tournament by another name and this looks like being the same. Make them lose a lot of their chips before they can top up, or at least put a time barrier, before which they can"t top up.
And lose the straddles.
--- End quote ---
Not sure i agree entirely, its a cash game with a bonus prize for winning it outright and in cash games you can buyin for the maximum.
Being able to cover opponents is key to exploit their mistakes and make money.
I think whats key to the format (when looking at progression to FT) is to make it that the top 8 players with % stack increase, as they have performed best.
Those 8 with the most ££ infront could have bought in for more, and those with the most £ profit again could be due to starting deeper.
Although we pay a one off rake fee, and get rake free cash for the evening, the shallow stacks make for a nitfest. Cash games are meant to be deep (like the beginnings of an mtt) not like a timed sng.
MintTrav:
--- Quote from: s4ooter on July 31, 2013, 22:05:05 PM ---
--- Quote from: MintTrav on July 31, 2013, 20:26:27 PM ---
I don"t like the concept of allowing players to take more than one buy-in at a time, especially if they lose any chance of buying in again. It takes some of the skill out of the game and makes it just a tournament. The last one was a tournament by another name and this looks like being the same. Make them lose a lot of their chips before they can top up, or at least put a time barrier, before which they can"t top up.
And lose the straddles.
--- End quote ---
Not sure i agree entirely, its a cash game with a bonus prize for winning it outright and in cash games you can buyin for the maximum.
Being able to cover opponents is key to exploit their mistakes and make money.
I think whats key to the format (when looking at progression to FT) is to make it that the top 8 players with % stack increase, as they have performed best.
Those 8 with the most ££ infront could have bought in for more, and those with the most £ profit again could be due to starting deeper.
Although we pay a one off rake fee, and get rake free cash for the evening, the shallow stacks make for a nitfest. Cash games are meant to be deep (like the beginnings of an mtt) not like a timed sng.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, but you"re meant to be able to reload in a cash game. If the maths says call, you call, without any consideration for tournament life, etc. If you lose, you accept that as a percentage loss and just reload. Here, you will be out. If players are allowed to double-stack with no reload, some will do so cos they have thought it through, but I bet some do so just cos they have read that you should always sit with the max in a cash game, without thinking through the consequences in this format. No reloads kinda spoils the game imo.
I can tell you now that I will not be taking the full whack at the start. I think I was the only one not to do so in Coventry. I got involved in a 4-way all-in at one point, that I wanted to be part of as I had numerous outs and huge pot odds. I lost that hand, but I was able to re-enter, whereas the others who lost their chips were eliminated. The possibility of being eliminated in that kind on scenario means that it is no longer a cash game where you call on percentages.
4 x £50 imo, with top-ups only when you lose them all or reach a certain low-point. As a compromise, maybe make each additional £50 available to buy every 45 minutes (or if you lose your chips before that).
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version