Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > Multi-table Tournaments

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:11 PM
reecelights reecelights is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol, PA
Posts: 87
Default Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

555 Entries

100 Paid

18% of the field paid.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:15 PM
ansky451 ansky451 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

Post of the year
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:17 PM
reecelights reecelights is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Bristol, PA
Posts: 87
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

Thanks. Sarcasm noted.

I found this interesting with all the Stars 20% payout discussion that has been going on lately.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:18 PM
ansky451 ansky451 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

I think a lot of the WPT events have 20% payouts, or close to it. I suppose it is because so many people are internet/satellite qualifiers.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:30 PM
Proofrock Proofrock is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 101
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

[ QUOTE ]
I suppose it is because so many people are internet/satellite qualifiers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? How do you draw that conclusion?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:31 PM
Jurollo Jurollo is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 26
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

I think it is a fairly easy conclusion to draw... players arent just buying in anymore directly, so many of them profit greatly just getting the buyin back.
~Justin
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-14-2005, 02:47 PM
billyjex billyjex is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: whoring
Posts: 242
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

comparing the payouts of a $15k tournament to a $5 tournament is kinda silly.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-14-2005, 03:07 PM
Exitonly Exitonly is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 3
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

why? we're bankrolled for $5 tournaments, and most of us were pissed that they moved to 20%.

If you were bankrolled for the $15k buyins wouldn't you be pissed that it's at 20%?


granted, we're not rolled for the 15k so for us 20% is just fine.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-14-2005, 03:20 PM
KneeCo KneeCo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 77
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

[ QUOTE ]
we're not rolled for the 15k

[/ QUOTE ]

Speak for yourself.

...wait, I meant to quote the part where you said we *are* bankrolled for 5$ tournaments [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-14-2005, 03:32 PM
Proofrock Proofrock is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 101
Default Re: Bellagio 5 Diamond Payout

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is a fairly easy conclusion to draw... players arent just buying in anymore directly, so many of them profit greatly just getting the buyin back.
~Justin

[/ QUOTE ]

But this involves a few other assumptions, including the following:

(1) The players in the tournament have a say in the structure. Will a satellite qualifier say, "no, i don't want to play in this tournament because they only pay the top 10-15%. i'm really gunning for 20%?" I.e., this assumes that the tournament organizers are trying to keep the satellite qualifiers happy and figure this is a way to do it. This assumption doesn't make any sense to me -- why would you expect to get more satellite qualifiers with a greater payout. Satellite qualifiers almost by definition are trying to take a shot at something bigger, they got in cheaply, and I've never heard a satellite qualifier complain about a top-heavy payout.

(2) If the players do have a say in it, why wouldn't the pros who buy in directly and would be more likely to be dissuaded from doing so by a bad structure, have greater weight?

(3) Another underlying assumption is that good players prefer a steep payout structure. Though much of current MTT strategy is based on this, that's because most MTTs have a steep payout structure (chicken and the egg). Does anybody have an a priori reason that such a structure inherently favors the strongest players significantly over the weaker players? If this is the case, where is the magic cutoff number? Why not pay only first?

(4) 18%-20% payout is significantly different than 10-15%.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.