**OFFICIAL Stars 100K added**

[other1]

I don't think its terrible. Yes it's weighted towards a huge first prize, but they are still paying > 20%. I'd guess most people didn't buy in directly. I won my seat for $20.. So I have a good chance of cashing for at least $800 on my $20 and an off chance of cashing for $175k. Doesn't seem so bad to me. If I were buying in directly I might not like the structure, but that's why I never buy in to big money tournaments directly.

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
but that's why I never buy in to big money tournaments directly.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you won't be dissapointed when people change the payouts to hurt better players?

[gisb0rne]

A great player can play a hundred of these tourneys and never even make the final table. I don't have a problem with a flatter payout structure.

My QQ held up against 88 all-in and I won a decent pot next hand with TT. Up to T6335.

[nath]

I'm out. Card dead something awful. So I donked my way down from 3100 to 1300, pushed J9s late and ran into big blind's AA.
I hate feeling like I've wasted two hours of my life with nothing to show for it. I never had a chance.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
A great player can play a hundred of these tourneys and never even make the final table.

[/ QUOTE ]
True, but the great player will likely finish in the top 35 a few times out of the 100 trials. It's for that reason that I don't like the kind of payout structure Stars is using today.

It's not that the payout structure is "flatter". I wouldn't mind too much if they took some of the money that would normally go to the final table and redistributed it to the ninth decile. Problem is that so much of the redistributed money is coming from the second, third, and fourth tables (10th through 36th spots).

[La Brujita]

I think one of the interesting things is how varied good players' opinions are of correct payout structures.

I didn't get what you meant by this response, were you referring to the 20%?