This might be a ridiculous idea, but...

[Martin Aigner]

still I wanted to share this idea with you (I´ll post this one on the internet forum too)

Would anyone be interested to play in a yearlong series of small buy in satellites (online) for the best(s) in the ranking to win a seat for the WSOP championchip event 2004. The winner(s) get a seat (maybe plus expenses) for the event and plays for 50% of whatever he wins. The other players, who don´t qualifie, share the rest of the 50%.

I thought about playin 1 satellite every month (buy in between $30-50, dependig on the the numbers of players). If there were 50 players playing with a buy in of 50$ for 12 satellites it would make a price pool for 30k -> 3 qualifications.

If there were only 10 players, we would need a higher buy in of course, but $100 with 10 players every month wuld mak 1 buy in + expenses too.

As stated before the players actually playint the tourney would play for 50% of the amount they win, the rest will be shared between the others. For example if there are 50 players the share-structure could be:

50% for the player
2-10: share 18% (2% each)
11-20: share 12% (1,2% each)
21-30: share 10% (1% each)
31-40: share 7% (0,7% each)
41-50: share 3% (0,3% each)

For 10 players the structure could be

50% player
2nd 10%
3rd 8,5%
4th 7,5%
5th 6,5%
6th 5,5%
7th 4,5%
8th 3,5%
9th 2,5%
10th 1,5%

Of course there would be lots of things to clarify, such as:

- What about tax?
- Waht about tips?
- Can legal problems occur?
- How could the payout of the other players, who aren´t in Vegas at that time be handled?
- We would need somebody to organise everything


Still I think that it would be great big fun both trying to qualifie and, if not being lucky enough, sitting at home and wait for the results to be posted at pokerpages every day :-)

OK, so flame away :-)

Martin Aigner

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I'm willing to keep listening.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

The idea isn't bad, but the hard part is getting a fixed number of people who can attend each of your satellites. If it's not the same 10, or same 20, or whatever each time, your payout structure becomes that much more complicated.

It's easier if you can do it in a 1-time event.

Or, if you have a home game, you can try other things. Here's one I heard about. Almost the same group of guys would play poker each Friday night. Each week they would take $2 out of each pot until they had $200 collected. They kept track of who attended each week. After 50 weeks of this, and a few weeks before the WSOP main event, they held a satellite. Everyone who had attended any of the weekly games got T100 in chips for each week they had participated. They then held a NLH super-satellite, and the winner played in the big one. Like your idea, they had a way where everyone else got a share of the winner's action. I forget how they divided it up, but anything is possible.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Martin Aigner]

Well, I think that 1 solution for this problem might be that that one would have to play in a certain amount of satellites to be allowed to have a share. So it there were 12 satellites one should have to play e.g. 5 or 6 satellites, otherwise the money invested would be considered lost. If one wants to play only 7 events, that´s his problem. With more satellites played the chances on winning one of the top prices increases. This would guarantee also that there would be more players the whole year.

Regards

Martin Aigner

[Martin Aigner]

you posted that you´ll play the Main event this year. Just a few days before the main event there will be the $3000 buy in NLHE event. Would you and others be interested to play a single table satellite for this tourney? Maybe something like $500 buy in + fee for everyone, 10 players, 1st gets the buy in + 1000 cash, 2nd and 3rd get 500 back, rest.

Winner plays for 50%, rest of the table shares 50% (in whatever percentage)

Martin Aigner

[Greg (FossilMan)]

I'm not saying your ideas won't work. I'm just saying that not having the same group of people play in each satellite can lead to complications in payouts. Plus, if you have to play in n number of satellites to qualify to win or to qualify for a team share, some folks won't play at all because of their concerns about not being able to participate in enough of them. If all of the prize pool, or even a big fraction of it, are going to the eventual winner who plays in the WSOP, I might opt out rather than risk sinking the money into 3 or 4 satellites and then becoming too busy at work or whatever to participate in more of them. Similarly, if attendance starts to drop off, who is going to want to come in new to the later events if they have little or no chance of winning anything?

You might need to structure it so that people always have an incentive to participate. I'm sure many possibilities comed to mind. Just make it so anybody who wins each preliminary satellite has some chance of being the final winner to play in the WSOP.

As for the $3000 NLH, I do plan on playing in that event. However, because I already have a coalition of backers, I do not think it would be appropriate for me to engage in a deal where my present backers don't get a full share of any money won in the $3K event. Even though doing so would be reducing their risk in that event, I suspect they would rather pay full price and win it all. Especially since we're ahead by several multiples of $3K in the last few weeks.

However, I like the idea, and suspect you could easily round up 10 folks from 2+2 who would like to play. However, I recommend keeping it simple, and just charging 10 people $300 each, and then have the winner play for a percentage, and everyone else get a set share (such as 55% for the winner, and 5% each for the other 9). I doubt anybody is too worried about making any cash, they'll just want the chance to play in the $3K event for $300., even if it means giving up half their action.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[MHoydilla]

Greg when are getting to Vegas? I have play pot/no limit holdem with you a few times in CT. I was wondering if you would be intrested in getting a NL-holdem game going at Binions at some point in the next few weeks? 5-10 or 10-20 blinds

[Myrtle]

I think a variation on Greg's "home game" setup might work.

I would be interested and I know the perfect site for it where
we can spread a "controlled" private tournament to accomplish it..........

Let's flesh the idea out a bit more.....

[Martin Aigner]

I like the idea too, but I´m not so sure whether this could work out online. I also admit that I prefer playing tourneys, so maybe it´s just subjective reason.

What´s your idea and which site? Maybe we could get some details.

Regards

Martin Aigner

[Martin Aigner]

OK, why not give it a try. I got 1 private message and at least a couple of guys who might be interested. Why not give it a try and see whether it works. This might be a test for a bigger series of satellites for the champinchip event next year too.

Set ups for the satellite could be: Buy in between 300 and 500. Winner plays the tourney and gets a percentage of something like 50-60% of the eventual winnings, the others get some share of the winner (in whatever percentage).

Of course we would have to create some legal contract, which everybody has to sign, since it is possible that this is about serious money (first prize last year: $367k, 2001: 411k).

Regards

Martin Aigner

[Greg (FossilMan)]

See my post in the News, Views, Gossip Forum.

I'm sure there will be plenty of PLO/PLH action before I ever get there. If not, I will certainly try to start some up.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Myrtle]

Martin,

The site is easy. Dynamite Poker. Pretty good software with SUPER management. I'm sure they would work with us on this, should we come up with a format.

As far as the tournament format itself? Greg & I met last night & discussed for a wee bit.

Once you get to thinking about it, life gets complicated. There are potential timing/scheduling obstacles that present some problems.

How about this?

- Form a "group"
- Each group "member" puts in an equal predetermined amount of $$.
- The "money pool" is then held in escrow at/by a mutually agreed upon party.
- We assign a points/ranking system.

This system awards "chips" for finish levels in a series of satellites thaw all/any choose to participate in. At the agreed upon end of the series of satellites, each player gets the total amount of chips that they have "earned" to play in the championship game.

Above is brief & sketchy, but I'm kind of jammed up at the moment…….

How about some further thoughts from any/all interested?

[Myrtle]

Martin,

I had responded to your earlier post, but it is above this one. Have you had a chance to read it yet?

[Martin Aigner]

Hi Myrtle,

thank you for your respond. Right now we would only be 4 players interested. What I´ll do is to post it on another forum, too. It´s www.thehendonmob.com (http://www.thehendonmob.com)

I hope to get more responses there, so that we will reach the magic nuber of 9 or 10 players.

About the structur you mentioned in the above post: It seems OK to me.

Regards

Martin Aigner