Flat Payout in the Main Event is A Good Thing

[AleoMagus]

I just posted this in granny's thread, but I'm gonna copy it here too....

Why are people so insistent on the claim that the payout was flatter? They still paid 10% of the field, and that still escalated to the top finishing prize. It only seems flatter because the winner made a smaller amount than the previous winners in terms of his % of the prize pool. That seems important, but it is really secondary to whether or not the same % of the field made the same % of the prize pool. This has to be looked at on a percentile basis, not on an individual finishing position basis.

After all, what does it matter that you finished xth place if you are not taking into account the number of entrants? Just making the final table this year was the equivalent of winning a 560 person tourney (in terms of % of field that gets this far) and you would suggest that in the 560 man tourney we should pay the first place finisher (say) 30% and yet do the same thing in the 5600 person tourney?!

In truth, we should be willing to pay the final table 30%, not the winner, and this is essentially what happened.

If you were to look at it as a graph of what % of the field recieved what % of the prize pool, it's not that much different this year as any other year. Well, not so different as many are suggesting anyways.

In other words, I don't think that there is an issue of the payout being flatter. Sounds to me like what is really going on is that some people would prefer it was sharper.

Regards
Brad S