Stars tourney structure

[shaniac]

I've discussed this at length with fellow 2+2er curtains, and it's clear that Stars tourney structure is one aspect of their site (perhaps the only aspect) that needs serious revamping.

There's plenty of time in the first two hours for a skilled, discplined player to accumulate a stack by playing solid poker but during the third hour things get dicey. Even in rebuy events with a lot of chips in play, at around the time the blinds hit 600/1200 (a nice 50% jump from 400/800), it can be tight. Then we hit 1K/2K--forget it. Average stacks become short stacks and unless you manage to double through aproximately once a level, you may tend find yourself in an uncomfortable spot.

Furthermore, we believe it is somewhat absurd to run higher buyin tournaments at the same pace as lower ones. It seems ridiculous that players who enter a $100+9 or $200+15 event should be saddled with the same conditions that a $3+0 tourney player is. Imagine if at the Foxwoods WPF they ran the $300+40 at the same pace as the $2000+200. Wouldn't happen. It's been said that in the Sunday $200+15 you get an extra T1000 (T2500) to start, but with the same 15 minutes levels, that becomes irrelevant in the third and fourth hour of play. Also, in rebuy tournaments I start with 3000 every time and alwayws take the addon, so for a much lower buyin, I'm never really starting with less than 5K, in essence.

I wrote Lee Jones about this and he said he hears a lot of different levels of criticism about the tourney structure. Some people say what I say, some say the tourneys take up too much time. I countered that an event like the Sunday $200+15 requires a day-long commitment and that anyone who plays it to win should have not made dinner plans, thereby rendering complaints of length moot for any serious person.

What do Stars players think of my comments?

Shane

[Toro]

Totally agree with you. Recently I got to the final 18, two weeks in a row and discovered to my chagrin that the end stage was no more than a crap shoot.

It would be hard to believe that the final 12 to 18 players out of over 1200 entries would object to the tourney lasting an extra hour or two with approximately 60K 1st prize at stake.

[La Brujita]

Shaniac,

I am 100% in agreement with you. I personally think the main reason blinds increase quickly on the internet is that players will jump into new tournaments and the fatster the blinds increase the more money for the site.

It is up to the consumers to voice their opinion that such increases lead to a less than ideal tournament setting and then to decide what action to take depending on whether or not change is made.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Regardless, 'Stars still has the most skill-favorable structure of all the sites. I do agree with your point that maybe at the higher buy-ins, the levels should be longer.

I did a little quick math, and as you get to the higher blind levels at 'Stars, the total commitment per orbit actually begins rising at a lower rate than at the lower levels.

For example. From 25/50 - 50/100. The per-orbit commitment jumps by 100% (150 vs. 75). But from 300/600/a50 - 400/800/a50, the per-orbit commitment only goes up 22% (1650 vs. 1350)

I think we can't lose sight of the fact that the basic premise of a poker tournament is to create a blind structure that *forces* action. Too flat a structure and tournaments become dull rock gardens. Too accelerated a structure (Paradise SNG for example) and the late stages are pure gambling.

[PlayerA]

Just as they've added turbos. Perhaps they can add "marathons". Then people can take their pick. I was up to 2am last night playing the 9pm 5 rebuy. I would not have wanted that one to last any longer.

Has the Sunday big one always been 15 min? Maybe I'm having false memories, but it seems like these things used to last 10+ hours (maybe I'm confused with the big ones on Party).

[whiskeytown]

what are you...drunk? - stop messing with a good thing, damnit...

LOL - I dunno - I know they added more to the middle stages a yr or two ago - it used to be that you had antes with blinds in NL after the first hr...now it's 90 min - I think it increases ok - compared to other tourneys I've played

and the big ones, like the $500 Sunday one actually have 20 minute blinds - so it does go slower and they have bigger chip stacks (start with 2500) -

but nothing can cover for bad play....when you lose half the field the first hr...that's not fast blinds, that's just guys who don't know how to play poker, and I think I get in 2-3 times as many hands in an online tourney then I do live, so to me, it's more like a 45 minute round then a 15 min. round

I think they do ok - it's those turbos that move too fast /images/graemlins/smile.gif

RB

[Beavis68]

This is a problem with all on-line cards rooms, and it is really frustrating me.

I was on UB playing limit Omaha 8/b and I double up in the first 20 hands, was 7th in chips, had a nice 2000 chips vs 20/40 limits - then the site crashed, but the time I got back on, limits where 75/150, I was down to about 1500 and 66th is chips. Never won another pot.

I was reading in Cardplayer, that TEX TEARS system has calcualtions for average stack vs blinds, and will increase the time in the levels until the average stack is high enough to keep the game competitive. Seems like that would be really easy for the online card rooms to use.

At the final table of that omaha tournament, the blinds were 6,000/12,000 and the average stack was 20,000 chips.

[eMarkM]

I don't know, I've just returned from Vegas (trip report coming) and I played in a couple of live tournaments, including WSOP qualifiers, and I have a new appreciation for the Stars format. Most of the live tourneys I played had 15-20 minute levels, and of course, you're dealt FAR fewer hands live than online. Stars levels probably equate to about 30 minute levels live and there's much more play to them in my opinion.

All the tourneys I played also had far fewer starting chips than 1500. More like 500 or 1000. So only the biggest stacks had more than 10X BB. So a raise and a re-raise for nearly anyone is shoving them in after around the 2nd level.

I do agree that the $200 and up events should have more time, like 20 minute rounds with the T2500 they give. That's what we do for KotZ events and it certainly gives much more opportunity to play. And the big events, such as the 650 WSOP sats and the WCOOP usually have 30 minute rounds and those give a tremendous amount of play.