2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

Ok, here is the thing:

Stoneii suggested that playing the SnG for money prizes was a little bit dubious for two reasons:

1. For most of us it is probably a -EV decision to play these (in terms of winning money - not talking of educational value). The reason for this being the tough competition - compared to the normal fish at this level.

2. For the high stakes players it is such a piffling tournament that they don't care so much, win or lose.

The solution put forward to this is to play $13+1 18 seater Satellites to the $200+15.

This would make it (more) worth while for the high rollers, and it would allow the lower stake players to have a shot at a tournament they wouldn't normally play in.

-----------

So these are the options:

Run *additional* games to the current $10+1SnGs

Change all or some of the current $10+1 games into $13+1 satellites. We only play one game on Tuesday - But we play two on Wednesday, so there is the possibility to run one $10+1 and one $13+1 on Wednesday.

Stick with what we do now.

-----------

I will post what *I* think in a seperate response, and I invite all those who play these things or would start playing these if something changed to respond.

Tim

My opinion
 

Some thoughts:

I tend to play crap knowing that only first place is going to get a prize - especially against such stiff competition.

On the other hand it would be nice to enter a 200+15...

But then if you *knew* you couldn´t make the time/date of the 200+15 then you wouldn´t want to play the SnG.

I would be really f*ing annoying if a random guy beat us all.

It would be way cool if someone went from our SnG to make the money in the 200+15.

And we could demand a report from whoever went to the 200+15 each week... just to check that our money was being well spent!

I think people would get a bit down *never* getting anything back from these (even if we are all equal standard you could easily go 36 weeks without a first - that is 9months!). That will be nasty change, what with most of us having our regular dose of fish at whatever stakes we play.

All in all I reckon better to stick with money, but I am game to try a few satellites.

Tim

p.s.: I am of course just organising these things - not *running* them. So whatever the popular opinion is I will go with.

Re: My opinion
 

Tim,
I like our SNG games as they are now. In the evening games, there are 8 people that get in the money. Not true in a $13 or even a regular tournament. I think I could predict the 4 people that would win 90% of our tourns with only 1 winner. Some of our lesser members (like me) can get in the money sometimes with 8 pays.

I do think the chance of getting one of us into the $200+ is a good idea. I just don't think it is INSTEAD OF...

If the guys (and gals) would like to play this, pick a different time.

Doc

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

Hi Tim

Please don't misunderstand, didn't think the current game is dubious, I thoroughly enjoy it. Just when waiting for the game to start did my usual looking around at what was happening in lobby and, on spotting the $14 super satellite thought, now that would be fun to play as a forum.

Would add spice knowing 2+2'er makes it to big game at weekend but do take the point it's even more -EV. Rather than replace, how about even a once per month game where we all descend on $14 table as an extra?

Just offering additions/alternatives as a point of discussion

G'Luck, stoneii

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

Now that's starting to sound like a really good idea.

Doc

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

Yeah, how about at a weekend once a fortnight, or month?

That way we could get the US and Euro players together a bit more.

Tim

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

I like this idea a lot.

Regards,
Brad S

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

I would not want to see the weekly SNG's end, but I would certainly be willing to help back a 2+2er in the 200+15, particularly if they wrote a "trip report."

I admit that the structure of a winner-take-all satellite makes me doubt that the "fun factor" for the satellite would be as great as for the SNG's, but I'd be happy to give it a shot.

See you tonight, I hope. (I may, regrettably, have a conflict. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] )

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

I don't like it. I think the 2+2 games are a better learning experience with 4 places paid than 1. The bigger possible prize doesn't make it more attractive to me (if I qualify as a high stakes player).

Craig

Re: 2+2 SnG: would people rather play Satellites to the 200+15 ??
 

Bozeman,

I agree. but

What would you think about a Saturday afternoon game for US and EURO guys combined for a 13+ with entry to the next day's 200+ for a prize?


Doc