blind structures

[jailhousejoe]

Hi all,

I've been having a discussion with a friend of mine who maintains that an orbit-managed blind structure is fair to all players, opposed to the standard time-managed blind structure. This of course, pertains to tournements only, and I apologise if i'm posting in the wrong spot.. its theory based so i figured here was okay.

if orbit-based blind structures were used (i.e. 4 orbits = 1 blind level), it would mean that just before a level change, that the same people would be in LP all the time, meaning that LP with added danger of blind increases (am talking largely later in the tourney here, where level jumps are massive in relation to chipstacks), would have an added advantage. Thus those that benefit from this, would be the same people every level. That of course would be unfair to all the other seats at the table.

His argument is that the orbit based structure would be fairer as 'lagging' would not be an available underhanded tactic (that is, large chipstacks dragging out every decision in order to get fewer hands per level and thus benefit from the high blinds in relation to the other players small chipstacks). I know this is not as important in B&M casino's, where you can put a timer on someone, but
its something he suffers from in tourneys online.

I was wondering if someone could point me to some maths or some explanation with examples I could use (as my explanation for my position aint too hot i know!), so that I can put this argument to bed. The more i think about it, the more confused i am about it.

BTW, I got $100 riding on the outcome of this, so please let me know if i'm right or wrong ;-)

[CaptLego]

It seems to me that you both have valid points, but I'm even more confused than you. So.... sorry, I'm no help in settling your bet.

But it raises a related question I've been wondering about, so at the risk of diluting your thread, I thought I'd piggyback this.....

It seems the blinds structure has two purposes:
1. Move the tournament along so it ends in a reasonable amount of time, and
2. keep the blinds worth fighting for as players are eliminated and chips are consolidated.

All the tournaments I've seen seem to focus on objective #1, which is accomplished by having a fixed amount of time for each level. I'm curious how that works out from perspective #2 --- i.e. how does the ratio of average_stack_size/blinds vary during a tournament? How would a tournament work if the blinds were increased everytime X% of the people busted out? Suppose the ratio of ave_stack/blinds was held constant?

In the tournaments I've played in, it seems that the end comes when the blinds are relatively enormous, forcing a crap shoot to determin the winner. That seems a somewhat unsatisfying way to decide between 1st and 2nd place finishers.

[tylerdurden]

Why not just deal high card for the button every time the blinds go up?

[CaptLego]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not just deal high card for the button every time the blinds go up?

[/ QUOTE ]
There you go. And while you're at it, why not reassign all the seats at the table --- you know, give somebody ELSE a chance to sit on that maniac's right for awhile?