Anybody besides me think this payout structure is odd?
I understand wanting to give a larger portion of the field some money back, but 19-27th place still loses $9,001 for being "in the money". I understand sunk-cost theory and all, but paying nearly 25% of the field but only having 15 of the 27 being paid even showing a profit seems like it would not be a desirable outcome. The way it's set up, you have to finish 8th to double your entry fees!
If I were in the tourney, it seems like I'd rather have them pay 18, and distribute the extra $144,000 saved from spots 19-27 to spots 9-18. But, that's just me.
Any thoughts?
DoctorJ
|