20% ITM on all Stars MTT's

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are missing my point. Yes, if you continue the same exact style you use in the regular 10% tourneys your EV will decrease somewhat. I'm saying it shouldn't be difficult for a good player to adjust his style to the new structure and thus maximizing EV.

[/ QUOTE ]
I understood your point. I'm saying it's wrong.

What if the payout schedule was structured so the top 99% got paid -- everyone but the first player out if there are 100 entrants. Do you still think you could get the same EV in that tournament just by adjusting your style?

[threeonefour]

i have to say i disagree with just about everybody on this one. paying the top 20% reduces variance.

i mean there is nothing magical about 10%. so just to flip it around on you guys. would you play a 500-1000 person tournaments where only the top 1% got paid? or even less? what is ideal for you. i really doubt 'pros' would be happy dealing with the variance associated with only cashing 5% of the time at the absolute best even if it did increase their ev.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
i have to say i disagree with just about everybody on this one. paying the top 20% reduces variance.

i mean there is nothing magical about 10%. so just to flip it around on you guys. would you play a 500-1000 person tournaments where only the top 1% got paid? or even less? what is ideal for you. i really doubt 'pros' would be happy dealing with the variance associated with only cashing 5% of the time at the absolute best even if it did increase their ev.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm perfectly comfortable with the variance w/ the 10% payout. They cut the pay to first place by FIVE PERCENT of the prizepool. I'm not comfortable with that. That's a lot of money, that i dont really want them giving away.

And as i said, good players are pretty likely to turn a top 20% finish into a top 10% one. So i dont even think it would reduce your variance by a lot.

[Hotrod0823]

[ QUOTE ]
would you play a 500-1000 person tournaments where only the top 1% got paid?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, all of the 33+r satellites usually pay 1% of the field yet people still play them.


I think if you someone more savvy than me runs the numbers it will show that ITM will increase dramatically but the ROI will not change as much as you think to show a reduced variance.

Yes there will be times that you will finish 120th out of a 800 runner field and make your money back where as 3 weeks ago you'd be out your buyin. Today your not.

But the 3.00 win you got 4 weeks ago against a 800 runner field was worth 600 bucks today its only worth 480. Costing you 120 bucks. Killing you ROI but improving your ITM.

[Proofrock]

[ QUOTE ]
And as i said, good players are pretty likely to turn a top 20% finish into a top 10% one. So i dont even think it would reduce your variance by a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

A really easy way to test this and some of the other arguments floating around this thread would be to use your (excellent) excel spreadsheet to calculate your winnings assuming the 20% structure instead of the 10% structure -- it would probably take about 30 minutes to modify the spreadsheet, and would add some data (imperfect though it may be) to an otherwise entirely speculative discussion.

[Exitonly]

I don't think thats easily done as you think. Atleast, not for me, maybe somebody else knows an easy way to do it.

ya don't like it, kind of defeats the purpose of what micro's are for.. nobody plays to cash.. I can make more playing a $5 1-table S&G than a 10th place in a micro in about 1/6th of the time.. point is most people don't play tourneys to cash, I think more should be rewarded for the FT, Lee should move it back to 10%.

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
Can some one explain why they did this? Is it so that the fish who play these can be statisfied when they finish in 194th and make $3.88? If you're playing a small MTT, shouldn't you always aim for the top 5? Its really the same to me if I make those $4 or bust out in the first hour.

It seems to me that bigger tournaments like the Sunday 500K should have a flatter pay out structure. A lot of people satillite into those. The first place for the 500k usually pays like $130K, so they should make it $120K and pay more people at the bottom. That rewards the 4 hrs it took to get to the money with at least an extra few hundred dollars. (of course the goal is to make the real money at the FT, but if you dont make it heres a consolation prize of $500)

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't make sense. The $ buyin is all relative. What is a lot to you is nothing to someone else and what is a lot to someone else is nothing to you. Saying that a few hundred dollars is a nice consolation prize doesn't make that much sense to me as you're still making a similar ROI for similar placings in a smaller tournament -- the actual $ value is not that important except for hourly rate purposes.

[whiskeytown]

I talked with ExitOnly about this last week.

About the only way the LL - (up to 3 bucks) tourneys can really be sustainable as BR builders is when the payouts are 10% - any less and it just doesn't really get easy.

I had a tournament bankroll building plan that I've had to alter - going to more SNG's for now, I guess - those mini-tourneys aren't worth the investment anymore, IMHO.

Yah, they need to change the colors of those 20% tourneys...that pisses me off how you have to doublecheck it. I'm mostly done with them below the $20 level.

RB

[yvesaint]

wait, exactly which tournaments are using the 20% payout? im playing the 3:15 right now and its still 10%