poker league

[mrwhippy]

I play regularly in home PL and NL tournaments. I started this 2-3 years ago and at that time we were all novices. We have since then gone on at varying degrees to play online, casino etc. Some of us have played significantly more than others and have become more comfortable with the risk/money element of poker/gambling in general.
We have subsequently reached a stage where half the field want bigger entry fees/more games/quicker blinds whilst the others want to keep a nice, friendly (namby-pamby [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) game.
Every Christmas we play a bigger game. Last year this was a 12 handed £25 no re-buy PL tourney with a slow blind structure (game lasted 6 hours!!).
This year the field is split...1/2 want to crank things up a bit, 1/2 think last year was fine, thank you very much.
I am in the process of trying to find a compromise which makes for an exciting night but doesn't exclude anyone.
One idea I have come up with is to have the same buy-in but have 5 fast NL tourneys with a points prize rather than the usual immediate cash payout. The idea would be that the player with the highest final points score would scoop the prize at the end.
My problem is that I'm not sure how to structure the points to create a situation where the mathematical winner is also the best player on the night, or even whether this is a feasible idea in the first place. The options I've thought of all have glitches so I thought I'd ask you lovely lot....
All suggestions and ideas very much appreciated. [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[Reef]

Say you have 10 players. First place gets 10 points, second gets 9 pts.. etc. Each night. If you don't play one of the tournys, too bad for you. Add 'em up at the end

[top2pear]

If you want to award the winnings to the best player on the night, you should have a tournament like last year's ... one that lasts 6 hours from start to finish for 12 players.

The more rapidly the blinds increase, the more important luck becomes. If the blinds increase more gradually, the skilled players have more time to take advantage of their superiority even if they're not getting the best cards.

If you try to complete TEN TOURNAMENTS IN ONE DAY/EVENING, you'll have to play at a lightning pace. This will reward the luckiest player for the day/evening.

If you have time for a league--which could last more than a month--then the first poster's response is a reasonable points system in my opinion.

You could also look at the way CardPlayer magazine explains the points system for its Player of the Year award if you wanted to get all PROFESSIONAL about it.

[Copernicus]

The proposed result...."create a situation where the winner...is the best player on the night" is impossible to achieve. That can only be done by summing the difference between the expectations of every players action in every hand vs his optimal action, not by the results of any number of tournaments.

Since only rough justice is possible, keep it simple. Use the typical payout structure for the number of players (eg 40/30/20/10 for a one table tourney) but award them as points. Total them.

I dont like the suggested system of x points for first place among x players, x-1 for second etc. It doesnt reward good finishes enough, nor penalize poor finishes enough.

[mrwhippy]

My idea is that one long tourney is a bit boring whereas 5 FAST tourneys is a) more exciting and b) the most consistent performer over the five games and therefore the best (???) will win.