Heartland Poker Tour allows questionable entry option

[tek]

for the November event. Read the last sentence. Then let's discuss the merits of this. I have been in contact with Greg Lang (who along with Todd are great guys) at HPT and registered my opposition to this. He informed me that it was introduced because "Paul The reason this came about is several individuals that did not qualify have been requesting it..."

My reply was "Some guys with more money than skill will buy in and suck out at the Sunday tables instead of taking their chances with their 8 3 offsuits in the qualifying round. So those of us who have 440 or 550 or 275, but not 2000 are penalized twice. Once by having to qualify and the second by having more donks make the finals than normal."

Geez, How about if I pay $4000 and go directly to the final table?

Grand Casino - Hinckley will Be Hosting
The Heartland Poker Tour
on November 25th - 27th, 2005

Preliminary Qualifiers will be held on November 25th & 26th at 10:00am and 5:00pm. The top 20% advance to Sunday. Final table will be televised to air at a later date.
Buy-In: $400 + $40 Entry Fee · Pay back for top 30 places!

Direct Buy-In To Sunday's Final Is Now Available!
Buy-in to Sunday's Finals For $2,200
Available Saturday from 5:00pm until 7:45am on Sunday

HPT website (http://www.heartlandpokertour.com/grand_hinckley.htm)

[whiskeytown]

I'll be skipping that one.

RB

[miajag81]

I don't get it; how is this any different from any other big tournament where you can either win an entry through a satellite or buy in directly?

[Chief911]

Its not.

And to not want more donk direct buy-in people is a HORRIBLE argument. Please read what you are saying. So you want the competition on Sunday to be HARDER? I dont get it.

I'll take a field of 400 with 200 donks over a field of 200 with 0 donks any day.

I'm happy to see the direct buyin. I can't drive that far and be gone on weekdays with a "chance" to qualify for the main event on Sunday. I'm very tempted to hit one of these, and am glad to see them implement the direct buyin option.

Call me a donk if you will.

Nick

[CardSharpCook]

The only way this could be a bad thing is if the buy-in money didn't go into the prize pool. You know, if the only prize was pride, then I'd agree with you completely. As is, your argument is baffling. I'm scratching my head wondering if you are serious.

Please remember that tournaments are only profitable as long as there are players worse than you in the tournament. The worse they are, the better.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get it; how is this any different from any other big tournament where you can either win an entry through a satellite or buy in directly?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a direct buy-in to the final round...Satellites just get you into the regular qualifying rounds.

[TomHimself]

stop whining

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Please remember that tournaments are only profitable as long as there are players worse than you in the tournament. The worse they are, the better.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Even I'm the only one to say this, I'll say it. I think better competitors make a better competition. We could argue all day about this.

One point that I am making and nobody is touching on is the direct buy-in itself. I perhaps shouldn't have muddied the issue by throwing the phrase donk in.

I just feel that allowing a direct buy-in is unfair to the majority of the field. Now from a money management point of view, it's stupid to spend $2k for a chance to win $30k. With $2k one could enter a bigger tourny and play for a bigger payoff. So in that regard it's may seem acceptable since the extra 1600 will go into the prize fund and be a quasi "tax" on those guys.

But still, not all of the 150-200 players financially have this option, so it is unfair.

It's also unfair because 150-200 players will have to beat 80% of the players in their qualifying round, while the guys blowing $2k won't.

And as I said in my OP; if this is fair then let me put up $4k and go directly to the final table...

[Chief911]

Logic obviously is not one of your strong suits.

Have you ever heard of the term game selection?

The WSOP is unfair too btw. I mean, how fair is it that people can buy in directly to the main event for 10k, while the majority of us have to "qualify" by beating 95% of the field to get into the main event. UNFAIR I tell you.

I hurt that I have to post this.

Nick

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Logic obviously is not one of your strong suits.

[/ QUOTE ]

And reading comprehension isn't one of yours. (Besides the fact that you can't spell the word "always"). /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

You and others keeping talking oranges, while I'm talking apples.

Buying into a main event qualifying round versus winning a satellite to that qualifying round is a different issue than buying directly into a final round without having to qualify at all...

[miajag81]

I am surprised someone with as many posts as you is making such a stupid argument.

1) You want to be playing against bad players, not good players, in every situation in poker. No exception.

2) This is still no different from a normal tournament like the WSOP ME that has satellites as well as a direct buyin option. It's ridiculous to say it's "not fair" because you can't afford the direct buyin. If you don't like the tournament's structure, just don't play in it and stop whining.

[TomHimself]

he intentionally spellt always wrong smart guy

[benneh]

what aJOPKE

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't like the tournament's structure, just don't play in it and stop whining.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't like my posts, then just don't reply and stop whining.

But seriously, if you guys don't see the difference between buying into a final round versus a qualifying round then there's no point in continuing.

As far as affording the $2k, it's a strategic issue more than a financial. As I said, $2k is better spent entering a bigger event with a bigger payoff.

I don't blame the HPT guys for trying any trick they can think of. I know it's tough to run a start-up business, especially a tournament business. I used to bowl competitively. TD's have people coming at them from all directions and have the uphill task of trying to please all of them while building a bigger base of competitors, sponsors and prize funds.

[Chief911]

Ok, later when I have nothing better to do than attempt to explain this in what your brain will think is logical, I'll try to make it more clear why there is NO DIFFERENCE to the end customer between a satellite - main event scenario, and a qualifier - main event scenario. Come to think of it, wouldn't you think satellite and qualifier are somewhat synonymous?

Regardless. Here's another reason this is great.

In event #3, the total prize pool appeared to be 100k. That means that assuming a $300 entry (Plus rake) there were 334 people that entered the qualifiers. And if 20% advanced, then a total of 67 people played in the finals.

Lets assume the same, with direct buy-in still available. And lets pretend that 20% of the people are going to direct buy in, and of those 20%, 10% will attempt to qualify first.

So, 334 people show up again. But 33 of them are going to plunk down 1500 (The direct buyin for a $300 event) instead of qualifying. So add $49500 to the prize pool right away. 300 people play qualifiers, adding 90k to the prize pool. And since 25 of our 34 people who tried to qualify but intended to direct buyin didnt make it, they then buy in directly for another $37500.

So, instead of having a 90 or 100k prizepool, we now have a prize pool that is $177000.

68 people qualified. 59 people bought in directly. So 127 people play on Sunday for a prize pool of 177k.

Please, oh please tell me how this cannot be GREAT for a solid/good player??

Nick

Note: I made this post with 3 minutes while my wife pestered me to leave. I did not double check my math. So meh. donkeys alwasy draw~

[CardSharpCook]

[ QUOTE ]
The top 20% advance to Sunday. Final table will be televised to air at a later date.
Buy-In: $400 + $40 Entry Fee

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, top 20% advance, so that's one in five. so, 5*$440 = $2200. You "win" $2200 by finishing in the top 20%. Direct buy-in players pay the same. I have no problem with this. True, I prefer smaller fields, I am a much better SH player, but I'm not gonna complain about more players buying in.

[tek]

As I said before you reading comprehension is poor. I agree the extra money going nto the prize fund is +EV. That's not the issue. The issue is they get to skate in.

And as I said in my OP, let me pay $4k and skate into the final table directly...

A personal note to Chief. Your people skills suck. You imply that I am stupid because I don't agree with you on some points. Well, you are stupid because you keep hammering the money aspect (which I agreed with) which is not the crux of the issue.

Obviously you obtained your moderator role not through ability but most likely from _______. Readers use your imagination. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[TomHimself]

how are the skating into the final table directly?

[Chief911]

Attempt at logic #2:

Please tell me how comparing these two things are apples and oranges.


Situation 1

The tournaments is on Sunday. The buyin is $2000 +150.
There is a supersatellite tournament on friday and saturday evenings to the sunday event. You buyin for $400 +25 and they will pay out seats in sundays tourney for every $2150 that is in the final prize pool. If you choose to, you may simply buy in for $2000 +150, as is standard for a tournament.


Situation 2:

The tournament is on Sunday. The buyin is $2000 + 150. There are qualifiers at 8 am and 5 pm on friday and saturday. The buyin at those qualifiers is $400 + 25, and the top 20% will advance to the tournament on sunday. If you choose to, you may simply buy in for $2000 +150, as is standard for a tournament.


Please tell me how these two situations are drastically different? The only difference, is that one of these situations is par for the course at the Bellagio or any other casino that hosts tourneys. The other situation is obviously the HPT event setup. The ONLY difference between these two, is the use of the word qualifier vs. supersatellite.

Tek, agree or disagree? If disagree, please explain clearly.

Nick

[Chief911]

[ QUOTE ]
As I said before you reading comprehension is poor. I agree the extra money going nto the prize fund is +EV. That's not the issue. The issue is they get to skate in.

And as I said in my OP, let me pay $4k and skate into the final table directly...

A personal note to Chief. Your people skills suck. You imply that I am stupid because I don't agree with you on some points. Well, you are stupid because you keep hammering the money aspect (which I agreed with) which is not the crux of the issue.

Obviously you obtained your moderator role not through ability but most likely from _______. Readers use your imagination. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. I did say that logic is not one of your strong suits, which I suppose is simply my opinion. I think most people might agree with me at this point. I have not and will continue to refrain from attacking you personally. I only ask the same from you.

Read my last post, I'd really like to hear your reply.

Nick

[tek]

Okay, I'll go slow.

The HPT tournaments have entry fees ranging from $275 to $550. There are anywhere from two to four days of qualifying.

That means that everyone who pays the entry fee, $440 in the November event for example, has to be in the top 20% of the players in that days qualifying round. If there are 90 players, the round is over for that day when 18 players are left, with at least one chip. Those 18 plus the players from the top 20% on the other qualifying days advance to the Sunday playoffs where everyone will start with a new stack of equal chips.

Yes, there are satellites for around $65 to get into the qualifying round (instead of paying $440). That's fine. I don't have a problem with that.

The issue is this NEW idea they have where instead of paying $440 to enter the qualifying round, one can pay $2200 and NOT HAVE TO QUALIFY BUT GO DIRECTLY TO THE SUNDAY FINALS.

So yes, the extra $1780 increases the prize fund. Great. But these guys get special treatment because they don't have to put forth the same effort to get to the finals.

As Greg stated in one of his emails to me, he doesn't think that more than a few guys will do this.

So therefore, the prize fund won't go up that much and the extra money will not benefit the finalists that much after the extra money is filtered throughout the payoff spots. So basically he is giving special treatment to a select few guys who admit they can't make through the qualifying round based on their skill.

I'll keep saying it. If this is fair then I'll pay $4k to go directly to the final table...

[Lloyd]

Civility please. Any further personal attacks will result in the thread locked and the violator banned.

[tek]

One dealer per table, please /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[TomHimself]

everything is civil in this tread no need for locking it up

[miajag81]

You have yet to explain how this is different from any other tournament with satellites.

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
One dealer per table, please /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Negative, Chief is not acting as a moderator in this thread since he is actively engaged.

[Lloyd]

[ QUOTE ]
everything is civil in this tread no need for locking it up

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks but it's up to me (or another mod) to decide what's civil and when someone calls another poster "stupid" the line has been crossed. Flaming is not tolerated. End of discussion on this.

[XXXNoahXXX]

Doesn't this seem like a step tourney on Party, where you can enter a step 1 for a spot in step two, etc.? Since you say you can play a $65 satellite to get into this $440 qualifier, and then others can buy right in to the main event for $2200. So basically the $65 satellite gets you into a $440 satellite which gets you into main event. Should people that get to a Party Poker Step 5 be pissed if they made it from a lower step while others bought directly in?

[miajag81]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this seem like a step tourney on Party, where you can enter a step 1 for a spot in step two, etc.?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, probably because it's the exact same concept.

[tek]

Here's an analogy.

You can pay $10k and play in the WSOP Main Event on Day 1.

Or you can win a satellite and show up on Day 1.

Or you can pay $50k and just show up on the last day and not have to go through all the hands and take the risks that the other finalists had to go through.

Now do you guys see the difference?

[miajag81]

That is not analogous to the situation at hand. The "final round" is essentially an entire separate tournament because everyone in it starts with the same chip stack regardless of whether they qualified in the "preliminary rounds" or bought in directly. It might be confusing because of the nomenclature they are using, but think of it as the "real" tournament just being what they are calling the "final round" and the preliminary rounds just a satellite.

[XXXNoahXXX]

Dude if you all start with the same chip count on the second day, its like a whole new tournament. Its not like I'm hopping into Day 5 of the Main Event and getting whatever the average chip stack is. It's OK, you tried to take a stand, by now you must have realized you are wrong, no shame in admitting it, unless you want to continue the "I'm right and the world is crazy" campaign.

[tek]

You are totally wrong. The Sunday finals is not a seperate tournament. It's the final round for those who were in the top 20% of their qualifying day. Here's the structure for this month:

Preliminary Qualifiers will be held on October 28th & 29th at 10:00am and 5:00pm.
The top 20% advance to Sunday. Final table will be televised to air at a later date.

Buy-In: $250 + $25 Entry Fee · Pay back for top 30 places!

Now here's the structure for November:

Preliminary Qualifiers will be held on November 25th & 26th at 10:00am and 5:00pm.
The top 20% advance to Sunday. Final table will be televised to air at a later date.
Buy-In: $400 + $40 Entry Fee · Pay back for top 30 places!

Direct Buy-In To Sunday's Final Is Now Available!
Buy-in to Sunday's Finals For $2,200
Available Saturday from 5:00pm until 7:45am on Sunday

The direct buy-in to Sunday sidesteps the normal qualifying round for those who pay $2200.

As Greg stated in his email to me, it's a few guys who basically admit they aren't skilled enough to qualify on Friday or Saturday who want to fork over some money to go directly to the Sunday final playoffs.

The extra money they are willing to pay is beside the point. The issue is they are getting special treatment by not having to beat 80% of the players on any particular qualifying day like the rest of us.

I'll pay $4k and just show up for the final 6 TV table. How about that? That's an extra $3600 for the prize pool and a guaranteed breakeven or better for me...

[Chief911]

Tek,

You have yet to explain what the difference is between situation #1, and situation #2. If there is no difference, then this discussion has no merit. If there is a difference, I'd like to have it explained to me.

Furthermore, your main argument seems to continue to center around that you dont want people who otherwise seem incapable of qualifying, to play in the main tournament. This is akin to wanting to get rid of the fish so you can play with the experts. This is not +EV.

Isn't that why we play poker?

Nick

p.s. This one day, I had two people challenge me to 10k freezeouts HU. One of them was a donk who was still getting a grasp of the terminology "flop, turn, river" and the other was Phil Helmuth. Which should I choose? This is tough~

[miajag81]

My PM to you will be my final statement on this. You are really embarrassing yourself in this thread.

[Chief911]

One other point. Your argument that you should therefore be able to pay $4k and start at the FT is also flawed and illogical. If ever a tournament were to implement that, you would need to pay 1/10th (Assuming a 10 person FT) of the prize pool. Assuming 300 entrants paying $400 each, $12000 would be sufficient to buy you a place at the FT. If such a silly idea were ever implemented.

Nick

[tek]

Okay, you guys are all correct. And the Sunday finals are just a qualifier for the final table.

I'll write out a check for $4k to go directly to the TV table. I'd like seat 3 please.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
One other point. Your argument that you should therefore be able to pay $4k and start at the FT is also flawed and illogical. If ever a tournament were to implement that, you would need to pay 1/10th (Assuming a 10 person FT) of the prize pool. Assuming 300 entrants paying $400 each, $12000 would be sufficient to buy you a place at the FT. If such a silly idea were ever implemented.

Nick

[/ QUOTE ]

Who would pay $12k for a 1st place payout of 30-40k range?

$4k would essentially guarantee a breakeven in these tournies if one busted out in 6th place.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, your main argument seems to continue to center around that you don't want people who otherwise seem incapable of qualifying, to play in the main tournament. This is akin to wanting to get rid of the fish so you can play with the experts. This is not +EV.

Isn't that why we play poker?

Nick

[/ QUOTE ]

That's for each of us to decide. In bowling competition and poker as well, I play better against better competition.

I understand your argument, and for most people it may be the best (read: easy) path.

[Chief911]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, you guys are all correct. And the Sunday finals are just a qualifier for the final table.

I'll write out a check for $4k to go directly to the TV table. I'd like seat 3 please.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, according to you, isnt every tournament a qualifier until we get to the FT, and then the real tournament begins? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[wuwei]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll pay $4k and just show up for the final 6 TV table. How about that? That's an extra $3600 for the prize pool and a guaranteed breakeven or better for me...

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep hammering this point, like it's going to just end the discussion. Read your statement here again and try to find the difference between what you're suggesting and what everyone who pays $2200 to enter on Sunday gets.

[XXXNoahXXX]

This isn't even a discussion anymore since it's the world vs. Tek and he isn't budging, and neither are the dozens that disagree with him. No matter how much discussion continues, Tek seems so bogged down in semantics and specific vocabulary that nobody will convince him he's wrong. I think its time to let this thread die. Tek, I think you should ask a moderator to lock this thread which has become of no value.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, you guys are all correct. And the Sunday finals are just a qualifier for the final table.

I'll write out a check for $4k to go directly to the TV table. I'd like seat 3 please.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, according to you, isn't every tournament a qualifier until we get to the FT, and then the real tournament begins? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I was being sarcastic (but being as intelligent as you are, you knew that /images/graemlins/wink.gif )

If the final table is THE tournament so to speak, then why are there multi-day events? Answer: Because it takes greater skill to survive multiple sessions rather than just plopping your butt down for a SNG.

The final table requires skill in short-handed play, which I agree with you is more dificult for most players than full table play with many tables left.

Look, I understand what you are all saying from both a prize fund and strategic entry perspectives.

Fine, let the guys who suck so bad enter directly into the Sunday finals. I don't think it is right, but I won't argue it any longer.

However, if I'm at the Sunday finals at the November event I will ask out loud for the direct buy-in players to identify themselves. I doubt they will, but I would like to know if they have the guts to raise their hand.

(Remember, I'm a schmuck).

[GoldenHorde]

The point you don't seem to be getting is that the "Sunday Finals" is the tournament. It has a 2k buy-in.

[ QUOTE ]
Preliminary Qualifiers will be held on November 25th & 26th at 10:00am and 5:00pm.
The top 20% advance to Sunday.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is a direct quote from the site notice the word QUALIFIERS, which is exactly what they are, qualifiers for the main event on Sunday which you can also directly enter.

And your statement about wanting to play with better players instead of worse ones is so wrong i'm not even gonna bother honestly just think about that for a minute.

[GoldenHorde]

Also notice the key difference between buying into the Sunday tourney and buying into the final table is that everyone starts with the same number of chips on Sunday because its a completely seperate tourney whereas you carry your chips over the the final table because its the same tourney.

Wow /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
The point you don't seem to be getting is that the "Sunday Finals" is the tournament. It has a 2k buy-in.

That is a direct quote from the site notice the word QUALIFIERS, which is exactly what they are, qualifiers for the main event on Sunday which you can also directly enter.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, qualifier as in qualifying for the next round. Starting with a new stack instead of carrying over does not make it a new tourny.

The guys who are paying $2k are avoiding competition no matter how yoy slice it. It's not just that they are bad players (which is +EV I'll admit) but they are so bad they have to try to avoid what has been for four months the only way to get to the finals--namely the qualification round.

These few guys asked Greg for the ability to sidestep the qual round admittedly because they suck.

For guys who can supposedly understand Sklansky's books, I'm just amazed.

I'll try one more time.

These guys are AFRAID OF GETTING KNOCKED OUT OF THE QUALIFYING ROUNDS SO THEY WANT TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE FINALS.

It's the same as if the chokemaster Minnesota Vikings said to the NFL: Look, we never make it past Round 1 of the playoffs. Put us into the Conference Championship. And let the other teams play their Division playoffs as usual...

If Greg and Todd think this is okay, fine. It's their tourny. But the point is the $2k guys have an unfair advantage by not playing on Friday and Saturday because they are avoiding a possible knock out.

They are buying their way out of an early knock out.

I do not believe that Sunday is a seperate tounry. It's a continuation of The Friday and Saturday qualifying. You are qualifying to come back Sunday by making the top 20%.

These few guys are avoiding competition. And you guys support that option because you are as weak as them. You seem to be as afraid of competition as they are and just want the easy way out. Be honest, you know it's true.

As long as we accept the reality of this, I will too. That is if these weak guys want to buy their way out of an early knock out, ok. But let's not call it the equivalent of a satellite because it's not.

[GoldenHorde]

You are right I take everything back.

Qualifying tournaments are not qualifiers they are just preliminary "rounds" even if everyone starts over with even chips and the tournaments are called qualifiers.

People who directly buy-in to a 2k event which is offered to everyone somehow have an unfair advantage over those who choose to play qualifiers.

Its much better to play against strong competition than against bad players.

And of course everyone but you is completely wrong including the several people in this thread who play professionaly. Clearly everybody is delusional except for you, congratulations.

[CardSharpCook]

Dude, this is baffling. It is like you think it is all about winning and not about money. The analogy of paying 4K to get to the FT only works if it is a 18man tourney. If you want to pay your way to a FT of ten, you need to pay (10/# of entrants). These players are paying the same as you to enter the sunday tourney. There is no special treatment. This is poker. Money plays.

I can't believe this topic is still being debated. The best part is when Tek says the $65 satelite to the $440 is ok, but the $440 satelite to the $2200 is not. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, qualifier as in qualifying for the next round. Starting with a new stack instead of carrying over does not make it a new tourny.


[/ QUOTE ]

Dunno how you have that many posts, but don't understand satelites.

If you start with a new stack, the "qualifying rouunds" were just satelites, with the top 20% getting seats worth $2000.

If you kept your stack from the previous rounds, yea that would be really wierd, but even then, it would be +EV for you to have 'donks' buy in at that level.

[tek]

It has not previously been a 2k event. They were $275-$550 events. Since their inception in July, the procedure was you pay the entry and finish in the top 20% and then come back on Sunday and finish the tournament.

The 2k option is new for next month because some cry babies asked for the ability to pay for the priviledge of avoiding getting knocked off on Friday or Saturday like they usually do.

Forgetting the fact that they suck and how good it is to play against them, you still don't see the unfairness of them sidestepping a round of play where they would not usually get through.

So yes, IN EFFECT the TD's are CREATING a 2k event and treating the majority of us AS THOUGH we are in a $440 SATELLITE.

Does this mean it's right that a couple of guys can change tournament policies to suit their preference?

Perhaps this topic should be discussed in a macro sense in the Politics forum because it mirrors what goes on in society in general.

[CardSharpCook]

I can offer no more intelligent response to this. This is astounding.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Dude, this is baffling. It is like you think it is all about winning and not about money. The analogy of paying 4K to get to the FT only works if it is a 18man tourney. If you want to pay your way to a FT of ten, you need to pay (10/# of entrants). These players are paying the same as you to enter the sunday tourney. There is no special treatment. This is poker. Money plays.

[/ QUOTE ]

Winning the money is important, but so is the spirit of competition.

If you think I am placing an emphasis on the winning aspect, the guys getting their rule change enacted are exhibiting more of this attitude than I am. They are the ones who are in effect changing the event from a $400 + 40 to a $2000 + 200 event with a $440 satellite because they want to win so bad they have to avoid Friday and Saturday.

As I've lately said, that's fine as long as we call it what it is.

It's now a $2200 event where the majority are playing the $440 satellite.

I just wish Greg and Todd would identify it as such so it would look cooler on the results sheet...

But they won't because it would look silly to have the event listed as a $2200 event with a $30-someK 1st place payout...

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
Starting with a new stack instead of carrying over does not make it a new tourny.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it does, yes it does, yes it does, yes it does, yes it does, yes it does, yes it does, yes it does.

[ QUOTE ]
So yes, IN EFFECT the TD's are CREATING a 2k event and treating the majority of us AS THOUGH we are in a $440 SATELLITE.

Does this mean it's right that a couple of guys can change tournament policies to suit their preference?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep and yep.

They made a 2k tournament. It is completely right because we are not debating morality. It's certainly not wrong for them to do this, is it? It's their tournament. Can't they run it however the heck they want? If not, why not? They can use whatever terminology they want or whatever. If they want to call the rounds the supersatellite, the final round and the ultra-final round, that's their business, so logn as the players are informed of exactly how the tournament will be run.

On another note, couldn't Phil Hellmuth and Gus Hansen decide that they want to play but that the qualifying rounds aren't worth their time?

Will

BTW, I'll sit down with donks and play poker anytime anywhere for any amount that even begins to look like it might fit in my bankroll.

[albedoa]

[ QUOTE ]
As I've lately said, that's fine as long as we call it what it is.

It's now a $2200 event where the majority are playing the $440 satellite.

[/ QUOTE ]

From previous posts in this thread, it really seemed like you didn't realize that. I can point out at least one post where it looked like you were insinuating that the direct-buyins were of greater value.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there are satellites for around $65 to get into the qualifying round (instead of paying $440). That's fine. I don't have a problem with that.

The issue is this NEW idea they have where instead of paying $440 to enter the qualifying round, one can pay $2200 and NOT HAVE TO QUALIFY BUT GO DIRECTLY TO THE SUNDAY FINALS.

[/ QUOTE ]

That seriously reads as if you don't understand the similarites between qualifying for the second step with $65, qualifying for the third step with $440, or directly buying into the third step with $220.

It was as if you'd never heard of qualifyers and satellites before, but now all of a sudden it's crystal clear to you and you're just upset about the structure of the tournament.

I think you owe a few people an apology.

EDIT: I just noticed that even the thread title makes it seem as if you didn't grasp the basic concepts before they were explained to you.

[tek]

My point has been that they changed the structure for a few players. The issue was not whether I understood the before and after structure.

I don't owe anybody anything.

[Lloyd]

Folks, he obviously isn't going to change his opinion so why keep trying? Just let this thread die by not responding.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
And your statement about wanting to play with better players instead of worse ones is so wrong i'm not even gonna bother honestly just think about that for a minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Then please check the first paragraph on page 89 of "Ace on the River" by Barry Greenstein.

[ QUOTE ]
And as I said in my OP, let me pay $4k and skate into the final table directly...

[/ QUOTE ]

Your logic here is flawed. A seat at the final table of an event is worth 1/9 (or 1/10th if tables are 10-handed) of the total prize pool which is much more than $4k. If this tournament draws 100 players total it's somewhere more along the lines of $22k for a buyin to the final table to be on-par with the other buyin values. Add more players and the value of a FT seat rises in proportion.

I'm in agreement with other posters here. It seems as if you're just throwing a tantrum because you can't afford to buyin directly for the $2200. The first round specifically is called a qualifier. It qualifies you for the final event which also has a direct buyin available. This is no different than ANY other tournament that offers satellites (or qualifiers if you want to be picky about terminology here). I'm sure the forum players here that won satellites to events like WSOP, WPT, WCOOP have no complaints about the direct buyins available to the other players - and rightfully so. The value of the prize in the satellite/qualifier is the same as the value of a seat. Just because this is the only qualifier available into the final event it does not make it unjust or unfair.

Why should this tournament be structured any differently than just about every other major tournament hosted on Earth? Are you really that concerned about the players buying in directly being more skilled than you? Be happy that you got a seat for 1/5th the price they did and play your best game. Winning would have a much higher ROI for you than someone buying in at full price.

Or cough up the $2200 and buyin to the main event.

Or you could just not play in it.

[Black Aces 518]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's an analogy.

You can pay $10k and play in the WSOP Main Event on Day 1.

Or you can win a satellite and show up on Day 1.

Or you can pay $50k and just show up on the last day and not have to go through all the hands and take the risks that the other finalists had to go through.

Now do you guys see the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently you don't see the difference. If you paid to be on the final day of the WSOP or paid $4K to be in the final table, you would always be +EV because you would automatically win more than you paid. If you want a berth at the final table, you should have to pay whatever 3rd pays, not twice the buyin.

Why are you taking advantage of those poor people who don't have $400 and so have to struggle through the $65 tourneys while you just roll up with your fat roll and skate right in???

[Black Aces 518]

[ QUOTE ]
Also notice the key difference between buying into the Sunday tourney and buying into the final table is that everyone starts with the same number of chips on Sunday because its a completely seperate tourney whereas you carry your chips over the the final table because its the same tourney.

[/ QUOTE ]

[adanthar]

After 70 posts in this thread, I'm not gonna call anyone stupid. Instead, I'll just say I feel dumber for having read it.

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Your logic here is flawed. A seat at the final table of an event

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't work out the numbers because I was being sarcastic.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems as if you're just throwing a tantrum because you can't afford to buyin directly for the $2200. Are you really that concerned about the players buying in directly being more skilled than you?

[/ QUOTE ]

I could pay the 2200, but as I have said a few times that money would be better spent on a tourney where everyone pays 2200 resulting in a 1st place payout much higher than 30k.

And as Greg stated to me, the guys asking for the new structure suck and need an advantage to make it to the finals.

In other words, they asked for a new structure because they can't do what 100-200 of us have been able to do each month.

The big question I have been asking, but you guys (who supposedly can read Sklansky books) don't get it is should tournies change their structures to accomodate a few players or should the structure remain uniform each month?

They do this all the time. At the Jackpot Junction event, they allowed a vote at the last minute to increase the payout from the 30 that was advertised to 40. Then they changed it back to 30 for future events because they realized that they had to flat of a payout. They rolled back the blind levels at the final table after the first event.

Now a couple players need help qualifying, so they change it for them.

You said that I should be happy I can get in for $440 instead of the $2200 some guys are willing top pay. I don't dispute that.

But I still have to wonder why would these guys pay 5 times as much voluntarily if they weren't getting an equal benefit from it in their mind? The benefit is they don't have to acumulate more chips than 80% of the players on either a Friday or Saturday--they just show up on Sunday.

Apparantly they feel they are getting an advantage.

And another question in general (not specifically about the HPT) I have is how do we know the extra 1560 goes into the prize fund? Nobody has a name tag on that says "I paid $2200" or "I paid $440". Some of the extra money may be added to the prize fund and some may not.

[Exitonly]

fadf;lajsd;flkja


i realize we were told to drop this, but you keep it going, and i can't pass up an argument.


Your seat in this new round (or new tournament) is worth 2200.. They're buying in for 2200, you keep saying it doesnt pay out like a normal $2200 tournament... SURE IT DOES.. they're playinga 65 person tournament, $30k is exactly right for first place.

I think deep down you know you're wrong, but you're stubborn like i am, and just can't admit it.

[ QUOTE ]
And another question in general (not specifically about the HPT) I have is how do we know the extra 1760 goes into the prize fund? Nobody has a name tag on that says "I paid $2200" or "I paid $440". Some of the extra money may be added to the prize fund and some may not.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one is very simple for me. I want to know that every cent a player puts into the prize pool goes there and nowhere else. House fees MUST be stated up front and taken from the entry with the remainder going to a prize pool. Any other buyin structure is completely unacceptable to me. I wouldn't play in a tournament at all if I knew that the TD was pocketing some of the buyin money and not declaring up front what the cut for the house is. If 100 people buyin for $2200 I expect there to be a $220,000 prize pool. If 400 buyin I expect a $880,000 prize pool. If it's stated up front that $200 of the $2200 is for the house, that's fine - as long as I know before I pay my money into the prize pool. If the tournament directors are pocketing some of this money and not disclosing it, not only do I recommend not playing the tournament but I'd also recommend making it public knowledge so that those clowns couldn't run a successful tournament ever again.

On another note, it is not an "extra" 1760. The value of a seat is $2200. Every seat occupied by a player should add $2200 to the prize pool. You bought into the first round for 440 and took the equivalent of 5 of those buyins to the next round - or $2200. Is this concept that difficult for you to understand with your 2000+ posts?

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And another question in general (not specifically about the HPT) I have is how do we know the extra 1760 goes into the prize fund? Nobody has a name tag on that says "I paid $2200" or "I paid $440". Some of the extra money may be added to the prize fund and some may not.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one is very simple for me. I want to know that every cent a player puts into the prize pool goes there and nowhere else. House fees MUST be stated up front and taken from the entry with the remainder going to a prize pool. Any other buyin structure is completely unacceptable to me. I wouldn't play in a tournament at all if I knew that the TD was pocketing some of the buyin money and not declaring up front what the cut for the house is. If 100 people buyin for $2200 I expect there to be a $220,000 prize pool. If 400 buyin I expect a $880,000 prize pool. If it's stated up front that $200 of the $2200 is for the house, that's fine - as long as I know before I pay my money into the prize pool. If the tournament directors are pocketing some of this money and not disclosing it, not only do I recommend not playing the tournament but I'd also recommend making it public knowledge so that those clowns couldn't run a successful tournament ever again.

On another note, it is not an "extra" 1760. The value of a seat is $2200. Every seat occupied by a player should add $2200 to the prize pool. You bought into the first round for 440 and took the equivalent of 5 of those buyins to the next round - or $2200. Is this concept that difficult for you to understand with your 2000+ posts?

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2200 is actually 2000 + 200. And the 440 is 400 + 40. So the 40 and 200 go to the TD's.

Now 2000 minus 400 is 1800. So actually I should have said the "extra 1800". I consider it an extra 1800 because according to Greg most players will pay the 400 + 40. If they didn't acquiesce to these guys format request, everyone would still pay 440 (or 275 or 550), play on Fri or Sat and maybe or maybe not come back on Sun.

Up until and including this month's even, one can multiply the finalists by 5 and multiply that by 400 to get the prize fund.

With next month's new structure, it won't be known how many pay 440 and how many pay 2200 unless they post a list of everyone who entered by name and entry amount. Otherwise we take it on good faith that the 2000 from the guys who pay 2000 + 200 goes into the prize fund.

Again, I'm not saying the HPT would do anything wrong. I was just asking if anyone has experience in a tourny where there is a two-tiered buyin like the Nov event.

And for the last time, it doesn't matter if it's now a 440 satellite and a 2200 tourney. The question I raise is Is it okay for TD's to be wishy-washy and change the format everytime someone asks? Is that a good basis to operate new tounament organization on?

[Black Aces 518]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And another question in general (not specifically about the HPT) I have is how do we know the extra 1760 goes into the prize fund? Nobody has a name tag on that says "I paid $2200" or "I paid $440". Some of the extra money may be added to the prize fund and some may not.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one is very simple for me. I want to know that every cent a player puts into the prize pool goes there and nowhere else. House fees MUST be stated up front and taken from the entry with the remainder going to a prize pool. Any other buyin structure is completely unacceptable to me. I wouldn't play in a tournament at all if I knew that the TD was pocketing some of the buyin money and not declaring up front what the cut for the house is. If 100 people buyin for $2200 I expect there to be a $220,000 prize pool. If 400 buyin I expect a $880,000 prize pool. If it's stated up front that $200 of the $2200 is for the house, that's fine - as long as I know before I pay my money into the prize pool. If the tournament directors are pocketing some of this money and not disclosing it, not only do I recommend not playing the tournament but I'd also recommend making it public knowledge so that those clowns couldn't run a successful tournament ever again.

On another note, it is not an "extra" 1760. The value of a seat is $2200. Every seat occupied by a player should add $2200 to the prize pool. You bought into the first round for 440 and took the equivalent of 5 of those buyins to the next round - or $2200. Is this concept that difficult for you to understand with your 2000+ posts?

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2200 is actually 2000 + 200. And the 440 is 400 + 40. So the 40 and 200 go to the TD's.

Now 2000 minus 400 is 1800. So actually I should have said the "extra 1800". I consider it an extra 1800 because according to Greg most players will pay the 400 + 40. If they didn't acquiesce to these guys format request, everyone would still pay 440 (or 275 or 550), play on Fri or Sat and maybe or maybe not come back on Sun.

Up until and including this month's even, one can multiply the finalists by 5 and multiply that by 400 to get the prize fund.

With next month's new structure, it won't be known how many pay 440 and how many pay 2200 unless they post a list of everyone who entered by name and entry amount. Otherwise we take it on good faith that the 2000 from the guys who pay 2000 + 200 goes into the prize fund.

Again, I'm not saying the HPT would do anything wrong. I was just asking if anyone has experience in a tourny where there is a two-tiered buyin like the Nov event.

And for the last time, it doesn't matter if it's now a 440 satellite and a 2200 tourney. The question I raise is Is it okay for TD's to be wishy-washy and change the format everytime someone asks? Is that a good basis to operate new tounament organization on?

[/ QUOTE ]

God Damn. I love how you say everyone is paying the 400+40. Except the people playing the $65 qualifiers, right? How are the $440 payers:$65 payers not the same as $2200 payers:$440 payers?

Also you said that you could previously multiply finalists by 5 then x 400 to get the prize pool. Mutiplying by 5 then by 400 is the same as multiplying by 2000. You can still multiply the finalists by 2000 to get the prize pool. NO CHANGE.

No, it's not a good basis to run a tournament to accommodate the most people possible. /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[tek]

[ QUOTE ]
Also you said that you could previously multiply finalists by 5 then x 400 to get the prize pool. Mutiplying by 5 then by 400 is the same as multiplying by 2000. You can still multiply the finalists by 2000 to get the prize pool. NO CHANGE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok. My bad. I was just focusing on the constant changing of rules and format that I didn't see this simple aspect. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

Anyway, as it turns out I won't be at the Nov event. I'm going to Vegas Thanksgiving week.

(Also, I did ask Lloyd to lock the thread a while back but he refused).

[Lloyd]

Ok, let's get past this thread. No, tournament directors should not change the structure of a tournament once it has begun. And I would say that "begun" means once the qualifiers have started. But it was neutral to +EV to have these other folks buy-in directly. Neutral because all it does is increase the prize pool. +EV perhaps because of the quality of players.

Nuf said.