Bay 101 final table

[lighterjobs]

WPT-BAY 101 SHOOTING STARS, FINAL TABLE

Seat/Player/Hometown/Chips
1 Danny Nguyen San Jose CA 881,000
2 Corey Cheresnick Coral Springs FL 769,000
3 Shandor Szentkuti Pacifica CA 250,000
4 Gus Hansen Monte Carlo, Monaco 1,007,000
5 Men Nguyen Bell Gardens CA 310,000
6 Jay Martens Prince George, Canada 1,165,000


www.pokerpages.com (http://www.pokerpages.com)

[Analyst]

Danny Nguyen is a dealer at Garden City, and an excellent one indeed; probably the fastest one there as well.

Matt Savage handicaps the final table on his website, Savage home page (www.savagetournaments.com). Having played 20/40 with Danny a few times, I agree with the "reckless" assessment but that may stand him in good stead tomorrow.

[haakee]

"Reckless" is one of the kindest adjectives you could use for Danny's play from what I've seen in many hours of 8-16 and 20-40 with him.

That said, he is one of the friendliest guys you'll ever meet.

I hope some of that $1M spills over into the Bay 101 80-160 game.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

Wow, I just was going through Matt Savage's website, and couldn't believe how few hands these guys played at the final table. I take it there must have been a LOT of time spent thinking, rather than dealing.

The final table started with blinds of 3,6 with an ante of 500 or 1000. I don't know how much time, if any, they had played at the previous level. On hand 16 they moved to 5,10K blinds and a 1K ante. On hand 28 they moved again to 8,16K and a 2K ante. Hand 44 was 12,24K and 3K ante. Finally, hand 67 was 20,40K and 5K ante. I mean, this is like 16 or 17 hands per level, which is pitiful. Either the pace of play was very slow, or the structure is really bad, and maybe both.

Also, the jumps in levels are really bad. 3,6 to 5,10 is OK, and the next jump to 8,16 is OK, though both could be smaller. From 8,16 to 12,24 I don't like. Things are already short-stacked at a final table, why not put in 10,20 blinds first, give them the hour, and then go to 12,24? And the next jump to 20,40 is terrible. Put in 15,30 and then 20,40, at least.

I know the WPT has a specified final table structure, but it seems that they're in too big of a hurry to end it without taking any risk of paying overtime to their camera crew or something. These guys are playing for millions overall. Give them lots of play.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[TransientR]

I can't get to Savage's website, but I agree about the blind structure, and I think you nailed it - steeper blind escalation means less filming time and cheaper production expense. But at the cost of the quality of the poker.

Frank

[I.Rowboat]

Heh...:)

Congrats to Danny, Chau, and Bernard, who also had a pretty good tournament.

[MrMon]

Here's a cleaner link to Matt Savage's Web page rather than the one above

Matt Savage (http://www.savagetournaments.com/)

[MrMon]

I was surprised too at how few hands there are at these final tables. I play more in a $20 SNG. But if I look at the blind vs stack ratios, it seems like there's enough depth. Last night when it got down to heads up, didn't they have something like 50-60 BB each? (Maybe 40). And it lasted 2 hands. Not the way I would have played it. I don't think it's the fault of the structure, it seems more like it's the fault of some of the players.

Where are our SNG specialists? Take a look at Savage's site and compare it to your own play, except knock off the zeros. Some of these look more like a $5 Party SNG, not a battle for millions.

[Hold'me]

It only lasted two hands because they both went all-in on the first hand heads-up.

As the board read 8c-10h-Ah-3h. Jay bet and Danny moved all-in. Jay calls and Danny showed A-5 for a pair of Aces. Jay showed K-10 for a pair of tens. A 4c on the river and Danny wins the pot of the tournament leaving Jay Martens depleted in chips. It won't be long now.

That gave Danny Nguyen a 10-1 chip lead and he sucked out on the river to win it in the very next hand. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Aceshigh7]

[ QUOTE ]
4 Gus Hansen Monte Carlo, Monaco 1,007,000

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? I thought he lived in the U.S? This is the first i've heard of a connection with Monaco.

[Kevmath]

Maybe he has a home in the US, but he's from Denmark and took up residence in Monaco for surely tax purposes.

Kevin...

[haakee]

I think Chau has been in the money every year since 2000. I wish he would've won so he would get the hell out of my games and move to LA or something /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[barryg1]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, I just was going through Matt Savage's website, and couldn't believe how few hands these guys played at the final table. I take it there must have been a LOT of time spent thinking, rather than dealing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am trying to get my system for Delay of Game Penalties used at all final tables, to ensure that there is more play. (They were used in Superstars II. The event, which had 15 minute levels, wouldn't have been playable without it.)


Delay of Game Penalties

Delay penalties address three major concerns:

Players: Not enough hands get played at each level.
Viewers: Only the all-in pots get shown on television, because each hand take so long.
Producers: Production costs are too high because final tables take too long to film and then we cut most of it anyway.


Players are told ahead of time that they are always on the clock when it is their turn to act. Currently, it is only practical to use delay penalties for the final table of tournaments.

Just as in other sports, there will be a person, not in clear view, who is the official timer. The Timer will have a stop watch that will be reset every time it is the next player’s turn to act.

When it is a player’s turn to act, if he doesn’t initiate his action in 25 seconds, the director will announce “time.” At the 30 second mark, the offending player will be penalized in the amount of one small blind. If he continues on without acting, “time” will be called at the 55 and 85 second marks and penalties will be charged at the 60 and 90 second marks. After 90 seconds, the director will count the players hand out: “10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, your hand is dead.” After the hand is completed, the required number of penalty chips will be taken from the player’s stack and put into the next pot. This will add for more excitement and will extend well to multi-table events, since a slow player limits the number of hands played, so it is only fair that players at his table will get a shot at these penalty chips.

If an offending player goes broke on the hand in question, no penalty will be assessed. If an offending player has less than or equal to the amount of the penalty, his chips are put into the next pot and he is out.

“Initiating action” means chips have left the player’s hand and have been put in the pot or cards have been released towards the dealer. If he says, “I raise” and only puts the call in the pot, the clock isn’t stopped until the last group of his chips is pushed toward the pot or an exact amount is declared. On a call, for example, the words “I call” are sufficient to stop the timer, even though the chips may not have been put in the pot at that time. It’s similar to a player shooting the ball in the NBA: if the ball leaves his hand in time, there is no penalty even though the shot clock expires before the shot is complete.


Notes:

1. The timekeeper can use judgment in assessing the penalty. For example, if a request was made to count an opponent’s chips and that took a lot of time, then a penalty might not be assessed. This is analogous to the forceout rule in the NFL, where catch can be declared when a player is pushed as he catches the ball and lands out of bounds..

2. A player may be penalized for delay more once during a hand. Also, more than one player may be penalized during a hand.

3. In the post-production of the event, the delay clock will appear somewhere on the screen whenever the delay hits 30 seconds.

4. In the future, if people really like this feature we may have two clocks, one each behind opposite sides of the table, similar in style to the NBA’s 24-second clock.

5. Delay penalties add excitement. We want them to occur. Don’t water them down by giving players a free pass. The NFL doesn’t change the delay rule in the playoffs or in crucial situations. The penalty is not a severe one.

6. The post-production graphic explaining delay penalties will be:


Delay of Game Penalties.

1. After 30 seconds, a penalty equal to the small blind is assessed.

2. A small blind penalty is assessed for each further 30-second delay, until 90 seconds. Then, the player will be given a “ten count”.

3. Penalty chips from an offending player are put in the next pot.

[I.Rowboat]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Chau has been in the money every year since 2000. I wish he would've won so he would get the hell out of my games and move to LA or something /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Damn straight! Nice enough guy, but a very tough player.

[WillMagic]

This is brilliant, and infinitely better than the 60-seconds and your hand is dead version. Nice work, and I hope those with the power to change things see this.

Will

[MrMon]

Although I like Barry's idea, I see two problems. One, it's too complex to explain. And two, it's disproportionately unfair to small stacks, the very people who may need more time.

As it's fashioned now, if a big stack needs more time, he'll buy it, no problem. To a 300 BB stack, one SB is nothing. To a 20 BB stack, that's something to think about. It's a little like telling the team that's behind in a football game, in the final two minutes, if you use a timeout, it's 1.5 timeouts, but the team that's ahead only gets assessed 1 timeout.

Which brings me to my solution. I think there does need to be some sort of time limit. But there also needs to be the opportunity to slow things down that doesn't penalize anyone. So establish the automatic time clock, 60 or 90 seconds, after which, a hand is dead. But, give everyone at the table a limited number of timeouts, say 2 or 3. This will buy you an extra 2 minutes.

There will still be a problem with using chip counts as a substitute for timeouts, but I suspect RFID chips will eliminate this before too long. Until then, perhaps something needs to be done if there is chip count abuse, but what, I'm not exactly sure.

My 2 cents.

[J.A.Sucker]

I think that Danny winning is actually worse for the big game at bay 101 than him coming in second or third. Granted, I don't know anything about him, but I suspect that one of two things will happen since he won so much money:

1. He will spend the majority of the money on a house or something. Granted, this doesn't seem like his style, but you never know, especially if he has a family.

2. He will play the circuit, and you'll never see him in San Jose again. This will occur if #1 doesn't, IMO.

I played on Friday night and the 1-2 game was practically standing still because people were so intent on watching the final table action, and hoping that Danny would win. The pros were actually cheering out loud every time he sucked out. It was hilarious.

We watched the closed-circuit feed of the tourney, and all I can say is that this is easily the most exciting televised poker action, ever. Also, I don't think that any final table would be better for live games in the future if people would adopt the styles seen on TV.

I also feel really bad for Shandor. He's a very nice guy, and I hope I never have to feel half as sick as he must have after his hand.

For those who don't know, Danny put the money all in preflop, and Shandor called on the button with AK. This was an easy call because Danny was going crazy. Danny had A7.

The flop came K-5-5. Turn, 7. River, 7. This crippled Shandor badly, and he finished fourth. He likely would have won the event had he won that hand. Mathematically, it was probably a 400K+ runner-runner beat for him.

[haakee]

[ QUOTE ]
I also feel really bad for Shandor. He's a very nice guy, and I hope I never have to feel half as sick as he must have after his hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

for some reason I don't know Shandor... I need to see a pic, I'm sure I've played with him. Anyway, El D said he's a really nice guy, but Danny is a super nice guy as well. You're probably right about him using the money for something other than the 80 game though. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[trying2learn]

Barry - I love the penalty idea you've come up with, but one question for you - what was Kathy L's problem with it on the first episode of PSII?! She came off looking really, really bad.

[Jake (The Snake)]

Watching the early round, I saw that Kathy Liebert had a pretty big problem with the fact that her 30 seconds began as soon as Barry moved all-in. She wasn't told the exact amount until about 20 seconds into her time. She was consequently penalized a small blind (which was becoming somewhat significant) which Barry ironically won the next hand.

To be fair, the stack was estimated for her as soon as Barry moved in and in fact the estimate turned out to be the exact amount Barry had.

However, I could see a problem arising if the estimate turns out to be radically different than the exact stack size once it is counted.

Do you think the system needs to be tweaked so that time begins after the exact stack size is counted? Also, why not just digitally keep track of chip counts at the table?

[LeeW]

I hope they can use this system. It becomes very annoying when players automaticly have to think for a couple minutes anytime you make a big bet or raise. There should be a price to pay.
Lee Watkinson

[bobby rooney]

Hey Barry,
I like the idea; however, I think that whenever an allin bet is made, that the time should only start AFTER a count of the chips is given. This would avoid the possible angle shoot of counting your chips slowly to make your opponents decision harder. Also, sometimes players try to hide their higher denomination chips so that it appears they aren't as deep as they are. Sometimes it is not intentional as the chips get distributed oddly where one player has an inordinate number of smaller denominations and appears deeper than he is. Anyway, when making an important decision about calling an allin bet, you can't really calculate the math until you have an accurate count, and it's only fair that the time be started once you have all the relevant information. Other than that, I think it's a great idea because I freaking hate stallers! I especially hate when players take a long time to fold just because they don't want you to know that they had their hands in the cookie jar. They usually aren't fooling anyone and just make it so I get fewer hands per level.