Tournaments tax the bad players (x-post)

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd argue the winners pay the rake/tourney fee/percentage no matter what.

If a loser pays $11 to play, it doesn't really matter what percentage or amount goes to the house. It's all the same to him whether the house takes 10%, $1, or $5.

He loses his $11 no matter what.

The person it matters to is the winner.

Eg, in an $10, 10-person winner-takes-all event, none of the money in the pot goes to any of the losers. If the house takes a $10 cut, on the other hand, that costs the winner $10.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is fuzzy thinking. In a tournamnet, each player pays the same vig (whether it's described as % of prize-pool or whatever. It does not matter. In that sense I must say that the original post by Tim was a bit confused, and Tim admitted this himself, as he wrote it while being tired... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]. He was getting ready for the Olympics on that day.).

Saying that only the winners pay the the rake/fee/vig for a specific SNG is meaningless. Think about it.

What confuses you is the fact that the winners end with something to "take" the vig from, while the losers finish with "nothing". But this is the wrong way to look at it.

Edit: The ONLY way for this to be different, is if the site decides that certain SPECIFIC players, which are chosen somehow, before or after the game, pay less rake. For instance, if YOU win the SNG, you take 50% of the prize pool (say there's 0 vig to begin with). But if *Jack* wins it, he pays 10% to the house. Fun idea, I think.