Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: Paulie_D on September 17, 2010, 10:57:55 AM
-
-
Would rather more play it later stages than massive starting stack. Def doesnt auto make it a great tournament. I dnt see much reason for over 20k s/s assuming 25/50 blinds and more than happy w/ 10k always.
As for antes - the earlier the better!! Antes make tournament poker a better game!!!!
-
Our local games, "BRAG" about deepstacks, I do not think there is a game now where there are less than 10k chips, our regular weekly game sees a starting stack of a whopping 30,000. What makes me laugh as well as annoys me, the tournament lasts for 4-5 hours max, I think the size of stack should dictate the length of tournament and amount of play before you need to make moves. In my opinion 10k or more should be the size of stack when playing a 2 day event. I think what everyone has to remember is the fact of the matter is in NL, the chips can go in the middle at anytime so therefore the size of stack is irrelevant however the length of blinds should dictate the playability.
I commented on this the other day and forcast that by the year 2015 local tournaments will have a starting stack of 1 billion with blinds starting at 1 and 2 million.
IMO it seems that stacksize is fast becoming an extension of ones p*n*s (No offence to our lady players who would agree size does not matter! :D )
-
Oh yes, had my rant, now to answer your question.
Stack Size in relation to Blind Size should be set to encourage all types of play. In my humble opinion, first 2 levels of any tournament should be long enough for people to make level 3 without too much confrontation, I like to think of the first two levels as "Getting your moneys worth" after all if your buying into a tournament, you want something for that juice ;)
I am a definate lover of "Gentle Blinds"
-
Our regular weekly game sees a starting stack of a whopping 30,000.... the tournament lasts for 4-5 hours max
Yeah....buy WHY do they only last that long? Is it because the players just don"t "get" deep-stacked poker or are the blind levels terrible?
I think the size of stack should dictate the length of tournament and amount of play before you need to make moves.
I"m not sure that this is logical...the stack size and blind levels & sizes should determine the length of the tourney.
Although I don"t use it myself..BlindValet (http://blindvalet.fr/en/blind-structure-calculator) offers some good options for creating the blind structure based on everything.
In my opinion 10k or more should be the size of stack when playing a 2 day event.
Well, I wasn"t specifically referring to APAT events...I think they are just fine.
length of blinds should dictate the playability.
And this is my point....what benefit does an extra 20k/30k/50k get you if it"s going to be over in 5 hours anyway?
-
Starting size is largely irrelevant.
I don"t tend to look at structures full stop, but when I do I only really look at how quickly the blinds go up (obv a combination of what the levels are and how quickly they go up).
You need play at the end of a tournament, and for a live tournament you need it at the beginning as well - how you manage to get from one to the other and still end the tournament in a reasonable time is the tricky part.
-
A recent tournament in Portsmouth had 100k starting, with normal blinds - 25-50 starting, 40 min levels. 24 hour game 3pm Sat - 3pm Sun.
Swerved it myself, but I understand there were about 5-6 players still in when it was stopped at 3pm and decided on chip count. And yes.......................there was a player knocked out in the first level.
-
Our regular weekly game sees a starting stack of a whopping 30,000.... the tournament lasts for 4-5 hours max
Yeah....buy WHY do they only last that long? Is it because the players just don"t "get" deep-stacked poker or are the blind levels terrible?
Blind levels are just stupid to be honest, they start small, but after 3 hours they then cut the clock and double the blinds, in effect the final table ends up being an all in or fold event. The winner is usually the one who steals the most blinds.
I think the size of stack should dictate the length of tournament and amount of play before you need to make moves.
I"m not sure that this is logical...the stack size and blind levels & sizes should determine the length of the tourney.
Sorry, was right in my head, just typed it out wrong. the point I was making was in fact the size of the stack vs the length of blinds, the issue is that a lot of the times when games are advertised as a deepstack, this is negated by the fact that after a set amount of time, the levels rise sharply (in some cases antes added too) so what you gain in the early levels you end up paying for in the later ones, I prefer to sit down at a structure with constant levels, Ie 30 minutes or 1 hour, not to find out at level 8 blinds are up every 15 minutes.
Although I don"t use it myself..BlindValet (http://blindvalet.fr/en/blind-structure-calculator) offers some good options for creating the blind structure based on everything.
In my opinion 10k or more should be the size of stack when playing a 2 day event.
Well, I wasn"t specifically referring to APAT events...I think they are just fine.
Neither was I :) APAT have got it set right in my opinion.
length of blinds should dictate the playability.
And this is my point....what benefit does an extra 20k/30k/50k get you if it"s going to be over in 5 hours anyway?
In all honesty I think it has no benefit at all, but I am sure some people like the fact they have a few "EXTRA" chips in front of them :)
-
MY THOUGHTS:
A deepstack (50,000) gives playability to everyone. The majority of local/pub game players play for fun, they don"t try to put opponents on a hand, they don"t bother to work out pot odds, percentages or outs etc. They don"t even consider a "five times the big blind raise" to be a significant raise. The advantage for these players is that they get their "monies worth" from the game. They can lose 10,000 chips on their first hand and still be in the game.
The more "complete" player also has the advantage that he can get involved when he has the "goods" and not have to worry about getting called by the "lucky gambler" who felt he HAD to call because he only needed an 8 for his straight!!
In the long run the "complete" player who has learned "chip management" (pot odds etc etc) will come out on top. Once the blinds start getting higher the "lucky gambler" may have just ran out of luck aswell as chips!
At the end of the day everyone has fun ;D
-
A deepstack (50,000) gives playability to everyone.
The majority of local/pub game players play for fun, they don"t try to put opponents on a hand, they don"t bother to work out pot odds, percentages or outs etc. They don"t even consider a "five times the big blind raise" to be a significant raise. The advantage for these players is that they get their "monies worth" from the game. They can lose 10,000 chips on their first hand and still be in the game.
Actually, I disagree with this...it gives "donkability" to the donks and disadvantages the "more complete" player...it also means that the donks don"t learn even though I"m a great proponent of not "tapping the glass".
But I see where you"re coming from.
Make it a 10k/20k stack and let them lose 20% of that! ;D
At the end of the day everyone has fun ;D
This...of course...is true...and worth bearing in mind amongst us/you..ahem..."proper" players.
-
A deepstack (50,000) gives playability to everyone.
The majority of local/pub game players play for fun, they don"t try to put opponents on a hand, they don"t bother to work out pot odds, percentages or outs etc. They don"t even consider a "five times the big blind raise" to be a significant raise. The advantage for these players is that they get their "monies worth" from the game. They can lose 10,000 chips on their first hand and still be in the game.
Actually, I disagree with this...it gives "donkability" to the donks and disadvantages the "more complete" player...it also means that the donks don"t learn even though I"m a great proponent of not "tapping the glass".
But I see where you"re coming from.
Make it a 10k/20k stack and let them lose 20% of that! ;D
At the end of the day everyone has fun ;D
This...of course...is true...and worth bearing in mind amongst us/you..ahem..."proper" players.
YoU DoN"t AgReE WiTh MuCh Do YoU? ::) ;D
Unfortunately, if the "donks" donk too early in the day they see no value and don"t come back!
As I"ve made the money in all but 1 of the 4-5 we have played so I"m..........
HaPpY hApPy HaPpY
-
YoU DoN"t AgReE WiTh MuCh Do YoU?
Well, as you can see, I did agree with at least one of your points...but that was the reason for creating the thread..to gather differing opinions. Please excuse me for expressing mine.
No, I don"t agree with mega-stacks just for the sake of having them...attracting donks is fine if you want to increase &/or are happy with the added variance...but there is the downside of possibly losing the...ahem..."complete" players when they get busted because the V couldn"t put down his draw to a one-outer.
Of course, it"s different strokes for different folks...what appeals to me in poker might not appeal to you...or the bloke next door.
Probably won"t...I prefer poker with more than two cards in my hand, played Pot Limit...but others are very happy with just NL Hold'em and will get on fine without me and have been doing so for a long time.
-
-
Jesterial (is that a word?)
If it wasn"t...it bl**dy well should have been...glad you got that one sorted! Now...how to I add a word to the Collins Official Dictionary? ;D
-
Jesterial (is that a word?)
If it wasn"t...it bl**dy well should have been...glad you got that one sorted! Now...how to I add a word to the Collins Official Dictionary? ;D
Whilst at it, please add Donkathon ( A deep stack tourney full of donks) , Donkament ( a turbo fulll of donks), Flish ( A player who cannot fold suited cards especially if there is one matching suit on the flop)
-
Shhhh...don"t interrupt me...I"m trying to figure out the blind structure for a 90 day tourney...starting stack 2 billion with initial blinds of 1m/2m
Somewhere I have to figure in a 100k ante.
-
Shhhh...don"t interrupt me...I"m trying to figure out the blind structure for a 90 day tourney...starting stack 2 billion with initial blinds of 1m/2m
Somewhere I have to figure in a 100k ante.
If you increase the starting stack to 5 billion, start blinds at 25/50 and increase the blinds every 5 minutes would this then become a:
90 day megastack superturbo
-
smooth structure over deep stack for me any day.
A starting stack should allow for one "accident" and still a chance to recover.
Stacks that are too big allowing for "more play" are far too forgiving and can encourage poor decisions (well they do from me anyway :D)
300BBs is the most you would need as a starting stack though 150-200 is probably fine as well
-
for me, it isnt the statng stack, but its the clock and the levels.....
i hope liverpool are beating them at half time/ and i hope we are f***king them by full time..........
-
It"s all about the blind structure. When I was in Vegas this year I avoided the $60 tournies like the plague with their 15-20 min blinds. The starting stack was irrelevant as it was always a crap-shoot very quickly. Also, you need to look out for missing levels (like 75/150 and 150/300). The $150/$200 tounies often had 40 min levels - much better.
At the WSOP I was amazed that the $1000 tournie had better play than the $1500, even though the latter had a 50% larger starting stack. Why? Because they added a 25/25 level in at the start of the $1000. One extra level more than makes up for 50% extra chips. Says it all. The 60 min levels helped!
-
3 things are important for a great tournament IMO,
Blind Struture.
Mins per level.
Decent BB at the Final Table, with this being arguably the most important. As I believe that if this isn"t correct, then it encourages "bad"play at the start of the tournament as people feel they need a big stack at the FT, so the whole dynamic of the game is changed from Level 1.
Starting Stacks are irrelavant if any of the above are not set right.
-
Decent BB at the Final Table, with this being arguably the most important.
This cannot be factored in at the start of the tournament purely because you don"t know at what level the FT will form.
That might be 50BB or 2BB.
However, if "playability" is important then there is an argument to wind back the blinds so that the table average is 30BB.
-
Decent BB at the Final Table, with this being arguably the most important.
This cannot be factored in at the start of the tournament purely because you don"t know at what level the FT will form.
That might be 50BB or 2BB.
However, if "playability" is important then there is an argument to wind back the blinds so that the table average is 30BB.
Of course, by which I wsa meaning "playability". You"d have rough idea what the BB would be at the FT, as your blind structure would control this to a certain level.
So, imo, and to ansa the intitial question - Structure not stack.
-
Starting size stack is all relative to the starting blinds/clock/levels. And number of BB"s on FT is really related to total time of tourney, especially in later stages.
Trend in some bigger tourneys recently has been to increase starting stacks, but also to start with blinds at 50/100 or 100/200 instead of 25/50. This does not cancel each other out though, as the tourney might start at the same number of BB"s, but later levels keep a deeper stack nature in the early levels at least.
There is also a general feeling that if you increase starting stack x5 ( say from 10k to 50k) that the tourney will take x5 longer. However dependent on the level structure the tourney will only take slightly longer, perhaps 4 or 5 levels more. So a 10 hour tourney might turn into a 12 hour tourney.
I agree with those who commented on a smoother structure. I would rather see the clock reduced slightly and have the extra levels in. With regard to APAT events ( and possible new season discusson) I would like to see the starting stack lifted to 15k, clock back to 40 minutes, 500/1000 & 1200/2400 (2500/5000?) levels introduced and an hour start earlier/hour finish later on day 1.
-
With regard to APAT events ( and possible new season discusson) I would like to see the starting stack lifted to 15k, clock back to 40 minutes, 500/1000 & 1200/2400 (2500/5000?) levels introduced and an hour start earlier/hour finish later on day 1.
I don"t feel the need to get into a discussion of the merits of the APAT structure and any perceived need for changes.
Let"s please keep this on a general discussion level only please. That wasn"t why I started this thread.