Rake Instead of Blind Increase in Tournaments

[InfernoLL]

I thought up with the idea the other day to structure a tournament with a rake instead of increasing blinds. I'm fairly new to poker so I realize this might not be a new idea. If it hasn't been tried, does anyone have any thoughts as to why it would be an especially bad idea? Such a structure could incorporate an increasing blind as well, but of course it would happen much more slowly. Thanks for the feedback.

[Ryner]

Uh, what would that accomplish?

[InfernoLL]

Uh, reducing the number of chip in play would serve the same purpose as increasing blinds. Do you see how?

[Sundevils21]

[ QUOTE ]
Uh, reducing the number of chip in play would serve the same purpose as increasing blinds. Do you see how?

[/ QUOTE ]

The main event of the WSOP would take months if not years that way.
Unless of course the rake was like 50% or so. Then, I would never play a hand other than AA and get blinded down.

[Ryner]

The blinds are there to force action and to keep people from just sitting around all day waiting for pocket aces, especially short stack. A rake would do the exact opposite.

[InfernoLL]

I realize that it seems like it wouldnt have a fast enough effect forcing players out, but combined with a significantly slower increase in blinds, it seems like it could accomplish something. Is the only criticism of this idea that it would have very little actual effect over the short period of time tournaments are played? I can think of other things, like punishing players for winning hands, that make it undesirable. But it also seems like good players would do better, as it would less emphasize needing good cards "while the blinds are low".

[InfernoLL]

The way I see it, blinds increasing just devalues chips, forcing short stacks to play for larger and larger portions of their chip count. When blinds get high enough, a short stack must basically forget about optimum play and choose the best place to "gamble". This would be much less of a factor if blinds increased more slowly, but the number of chips in play decreased.

[golFUR]

The first obvious objection is why fix what isn't broke? The purpose of a rake is to pay the house, the alternative to a rake is table rent. The purpose of a blind is to force action. Using one for the other doesn't seem necessary.

[ QUOTE ]
When blinds get high enough, a short stack must basically forget about optimum play and choose the best place to "gamble".

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is the short stack's punishment for getting short stacked. If you came up with this idea as a response to losing a few tourns on a short stack I'd suggest you learn to play more aggressively up front rather than look to alter the game to protect slower players.

[whiskeytown]

yer kidding, right?

blinds and antes come from everyone -
rake comes from pots won...

all you'd have to do is never play a hand -

worst idea. ever.

RB

[Skirmish]

The blinds create a pot for the first action. If the rake takes the majority of the blinds value out of the game, why would the first player put in chips? And who would cold call a bet?

Right now if it is 200-100, and I bet 400: I'm playing for 300 profit. In your game my profit would be 150? Less?

Right now if some cold calls my raise there is 400 vs 700 pot. Again in your game the pot is 400 vs 550.

Blinds make action. Rakes kill them.

[InfernoLL]

[ QUOTE ]
yer kidding, right?

blinds and antes come from everyone -
rake comes from pots won...

all you'd have to do is never play a hand -

worst idea. ever.

RB

[/ QUOTE ]

So clearly this is a bad idea, but I think several of you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not suggesting anyone play Hold 'Em without blinds, I'm suggesting blinds increase more slowly and a rake be instituted to compensate for lower blinds. You couldn't just sit around folding every hand.
Also, I'm not suggesting the rake be huge, as one post suggested, 50%. It would be much smaller. Obviously this would not be enough to take the place of increasing blinds faster.
Finally, I'm not suggesting anyone do this, I'm only seeking opinions as to why it's a bad idea.

[InfernoLL]

Oh, and I don't play tournaments at all. It's just a novel idea I thought up.

[bugstud]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and I don't play tournaments at all. It's just a novel idea I thought up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doesn't work. Can we can end the thread quietly, please?