20% ITM on all Stars MTT's

[Exitonly]

tournaments at random have it. the 50r does, the 50 freezeout did it's really stupid.


LEE JONES HELP US OUT MAN!

[ QUOTE ]
maybe send some emails to support saying you dont like the 20% and maybe they will listen

[/ QUOTE ]

I've done this and the reply from Stars support indicated they are still reviewing the new structure. We may still have hope. Let Stars know how you feel about the new structure. It won't be reverted back if no feedback is provided to them.

[Rick Diesel]

[ QUOTE ]
Though I suppose it will be a nice way to pick up some spare TLB points.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they have changed this also, which I did not notice, they still are, and always have, given TLB points to the top 15% finishers in the tourney. TLB points have nothing to do with cashing.

[odellthurman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Though I suppose it will be a nice way to pick up some spare TLB points.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless they have changed this also, which I did not notice, they still are, and always have, given TLB points to the top 15% finishers in the tourney. TLB points have nothing to do with cashing.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. I busted out of $3 rebuy last night in the money, but not in the top 15%. I got paid, but I did not get any TLB points.

[gobboboy]

I am also against this new system. No one wants to play for 3 hours and win $1 more than their buyin, then have a really good run and win $100 less than they should. If the $3r that I won paid to the top 20% I think I would've cut myself.

[Tom Bayes]

A couple of comments:

1. As of the last time I looked, the 20% payouts were only for the NL Holdem tournaments $10 and under. The small buy-in events in all other games (limit holdem, omaha, stud) were still paying 10%. I played a $1 stud H/L last night and it was paying 10%.

2. I have played a few hundred tournaments at Stars (mostly micro buy-in stuff) over the last few years. I admit I used to be a weak-tight chump who either just missed or barely made the money a lot and that I've had a small number of FTs and no wins at Stars (I have won at other sites). If I have time tonight, I might take my database and see how my ITM% and ROI would have changed if 20% payouts had been used on all of these events. I can't do this right now.

3. Here's a rant that I originally posted elsewhere:

Traditionally Stars has always paid ~10% of the field in MTTs. Some sites pay more. For example 24h and other B2B Network skins usually pay ~16% (about 1 of every 6) in their tourneys. Stars is now paying ~20% of the field in NL Holdem tournaments with a $10 or less buy-in; non-NLHE events have not been changed yet. I am against this change. In order to give twice as many people trivial payouts (what I call "Taco Bell" money), a lot of money has been taken from the final 3 tables. If you are lucky enough to final table, you'll make less than before. The second (10-18th) and third (19th-27th) tables in the 1000+ events have really gotten hosed. The payout used to almost double from third to second table, not anymore. Similarly, the pay used to virtually double from 10th to 9th place; not now.

For example, I finished 13th place in a $3 NLHE event with over 2100 players a few days ago (soon after 20% was introduced) and was paid $19.14. 19th place got about $16 and 9th place got about $28.

I also believe Stars' spread between 9th place and 1st place is too extreme. Final tables are usually all-in festivals forced by the fact that several players will be "short-stacked" (i.e. under 10 BB) and luck is a big element. In the big tourneys like the $200 it is pretty typical for a deal to be made. You can make deals in the small tourneys as well, although I've rarely seen it. You do have to email and get the attention of support, since Lee Jones doesn't rail the $3 events.

In the event I played last night, 9th place made $28.76 (0.45% of prize pool) and 1st place made $1116.16 (17.5% of prize pool). 352nd-450th made $5.10 (0.08% of prize pool). Ridiculous! I don't like the fact that 1st place is making 39 times as much as 9th place, but I'm certainly not advocating take more away from the top 3. For some context, in the WSOP main event, Hachem made $7.5M for first and Matusow made $1M for ninth. I think the spread between 1st and 9th (last player on FT) should be about 10-15 times as much money; I admit that 9th place was inflated at the WSOP so the final table could all be advertised as million dollar winners. It's a absolute travesty that 9th place (a person on the FT) is only making a little over 5 times as much as the schmuck who stalled and finished 450th.

I think that about 8-12% of the field should be paid (so about 1 out of every 8 to 12 players) and that the winner should make about 10-15 times the amount the first player eliminated from the final table does.

4. If you want to cash 30+% of the time, play single-table SNGs.

[NorthernGuy]

I just think it was a big jump to test out. They could have tried 15% payouts instead of jumping right to 20%.

[La Brujita]

I like 20% and I don't think I am very weak tight. I also like having less of the money paid to the top three and having it spread out a bit more among the top finishers.

I have had a lot of 5-20 finishes in the bigger tourneys in the last few months and it was (to a large extent) luck not skill that kept me from higher places. That is just how multis go and personally think the payout structure overempahsizes luck vs skill.

I would have no problem at all with top heavy payouts if there were more play in the final two tables in tournaments. But with the blind structure being as it is...

Edit to say I haven't run the math, nor do I know how but my gut feeling is this wouldn't really hurt my ev much if at all.

The bad players are the ones who constantly go out early, if you are the one playing well shouldn't you be going out inthe 10%-20% way more often than a bad player? Just my gut feeling.

The complaint lies in the fact that an additional 10% of the players are being paid out and the money is coming directly from the top payout spots to fund these additional payouts. I'm not a huge fan of playing 3-4 hours (standard time to get to the bubble in 1000+ entrant MTTs) just to make back my buy in plus 10%. I would prefer to completely lose that buy in and have an opportunity to win 25% of the prizepool for first place instead of 19.5%. These are the actual differences in payout. In a $3,000.00 prize pool that's a difference of $150 to the first place finisher. The biggest hits in ROI are to the final table which means money is being taken from these players' pockets and handed to players who couldn't make the cut.

Aren't people supposed to be rewarded for superior play? I think the 10% payout structure was just fine. Why should the top players be penalized because a large majority of the player base isn't capable of learning better strategies?

Consider this is coming from someone who is fairly new to poker and has yet to make a FT. When I do make it there I don't want to feel like I'm being short-changed, which is what the new 20% payout structure essentially does. I'm sure plenty of the top players in the Stars MTTs that are affected are unhappy with this change. I know I am.

[La Brujita]

FWIW, I recognize I may well be wrong on this issue.

I guess my issue with multis is it is just ridiculous how little play there is in them. I just don't think its a very smart way to finish these tourneys.

Also, fwiw, when I am in the money in a Party Super, I don't even look at the payout structures because all I am trying to do is final table and then get a good result.

I know that doesn't really answer your reply at all, but maybe this is just a disguised frustration post.

I didn't realize all the money comes off the top, that doesn't make much sense either.
Also, as I mentioned to mbe offline, I think letting the weaker players recycle their money is not a bad thing at all.

Ultimately I guess my point is something has to be done to fix what I think is a screwed up system of completing tourneys, this may not be the answer, but I am open to change.

I'm probably well in the minority. One thing I have always thought is I wish they could roll back the blinds at the final table and let people play it out. I know that is silly but its always in my head. And sorry for the partial thread hijack.