Ryan brought up a valid point when I started floating the idea of a HORSE tourney and that is that there are three stud games and two flop games. I agree that there would be more balance to, for instance, a HERO tourney. Hold'em, Stud Eight, Razz, and O/8. That would give two flop games and two stud games, all fixed limit. It would also be one high game, two hi/lo games, and one low game with one hi/lo for each flop and stud games.
I'm doing research on blinds schedules. One thing that some guys on the forum do that I think makes sense is to adjust blind levels depending on the game being played. Some just do 15 min for flop and 20 min for stud but since we will be using software I think we can be more granular than that because O/8 hands take much longer than Hold'em. I'm doing research on that too to get approximate ratios.
There are also two takes on how to elevate blinds, new stakes each round or clump them up. I think it makes enough sense to just clump them so we would play both flop games at one level then bump stakes up for both stud games, then bump them up again for both flop levels again. That way we can keep some rhythm going between rounds and we don't get as screwed up any more than necessary.
Since there is Stud involved it would be a maximum of 8 players. I doubt we would exceed that anyway so it is probably just as well to cap it there.
We have another T&I tourney this weekend (10th) so would everyone be interested in doing it the following weekend (16th)? Depending where it is hosted we could run a cash game at a second table for those who don't want to play in the HERO tourney and for the early exits from the tourney.
I was thinking $50 for the HORSE tourney to echo the $50K buy-in for the WSOP event but since we are only doing 4 of the 5 games how does $40 entry sound? And for a table of eight, a 200/120/80 payout?
Feedback on format, structure, date, etc.?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
My preference would be to keep Stud and Stud 8, and ditch Razz. Razz and Stud 8 are similar with the soul-crushing low chasing. The better variety would be one pure high stud game, and only one with soul-crushing low chasing. I'd play in whatever, though.
But the soul crushing miss on Stud 8 can turn into a soul uplifting high hand! At least Stud 8 gives you a backdoor to miss one thing and make another. Missing in Stud Hi just gives you nothing in return. I think it is just as soul crushing to be fed four to a straight flush then brick three streets in a row. Whereas in Razz, you can win even with a hand as good as Quads theoretically, just depends on what else is out there. I really think that you would just be trading one soul crush for another. Plus having Razz appeals to my anal retentive nature by having a perfectly symmetrical balance of a high, low, and two hi/lo games. But if everyone wants a HOSE tourney instead we can go that way.
I would be a bit disappointed if the tourney did not end in no limit hold'em.
Isn't no limit holdem how the WSOP tourney ends? With all of our players so experienced in no limit hold'm this would just seem the most fitting to crown the champ of poker for this day.
One vote for Horse just like WSOP.
Jase-
WSOP stopped that and plays HORSE all the way through now.
I wouldn't mind playing HERO. Razz is a must obviously.
I would rather not put $40.00 down on all those games that I don't know as well as well as I would like. I guess I would probably do it though to be honest.
Also, I now officially dislike rebuys and HATE add-ons. Someone needs to explain to me what the fucking point of a fucking add-on is. Tell me.
And at the WSOP I think they call it SHOE and not HOSE.
I knew Marsh would defend Razz. Do you really like it as a game more than Stud, Marsh, or is it just that you dream of a bracelet in it? I also know there's no way Martin wouldn't include his new fake cake baby. Whatever, I think it's dumb to cut the classic standard and make three of the four games involve low, but there's no gun to my head. Organize a tournament, and I'll decide if I want to play in it--appreciating your efforts either way.
But thanks for pointinng out that the WSoP agrees with me at least...if you are going to cut a game from HORSE, cut Razz.
Jason, the tourney would not end in NL Hold'em but the evening most certainly will assuming we have two tables running. I also think that having all games run as fixed limit helps to make sure that the tournament rewards well rounded players. If NLHE were included then a specialist could just sit down and fold all Stud and Omaha hands and concentrate on picking up chips in the NLHE levels.
This is not to say that we couldn't run a different tournament that included NLHE and PLO8 but I wanted to pay homage to the HORSE event with a tourney that mimicked what to some is the new most coveted bracelet at the WSOP.
Marsh, tell me the stakes you want to play a mixed game tourney for then. If we don't want it to be a crap shoot, it is going to take time to play that much limit poker and I figured people would want to make it worth their while to sit down and play a few hours in a tourney.
The reason I implement add-ons is to prevent someone from intentionally d0nking off a short stack near the end of a rebuy period so that they can reload to a full buy-in. If you are in a T1000 tourney with rebuys only and are down to T100 chips with 15 minutes to go, I would not blame anyone who tried to lose those chips by getting their money in as bad as possible so they can continue with a chance at winning instead of crippled.
I have priced add-ons to be cheaper than a rebuy for the same number of chips to prevent intentional d0nkage. I think trying to dump chips works against the integrity of the game.
Rebuys/add-ons also allow players to endure losing an Aces versus Kings matchup early in the tourney and having to sit the rest of the night and lets players get more play out of the tourney. For this month's tourney I've changed pricing to allow a single rebuy instead of multiple and also changed the pricing in order to discourage frivolous rebuying. There is still a safety net for a bad beat but it will sting more than it did last time.
I am working on a different solution that I will post about later on.
I am still looking around and there doesn't seem to be a standard. Some places claim SHOE and HOSE are interchangeable but from what I've seen,
FTP uses HOSE to refer to
Hold'em
O8
Stud
Stud 8
They use the letter "A" to refer to Omaha Hi only such as on their HA table running just Hold'em and Omaha Hi.
WSOP uses SHOE to refer to
Stud
Hold'em
Omaha (Hi only)
Stud 8
Ryan, I used to play Razz but now prefer Stud 8 as my top earner game. Razz is such a soul crusher! lol Actually, I think Hold'em has as much soul crushing but when Hold'em does it, it happens at the turn of a single card and for a lot more of your stack at one time. To me it's just a difference of pulling the band-aid off slow or fast.
What I like about Razz is that it acts as a complement to the other games since you are trying for low but there is no qualifier. On the other hand, one could argue that the Razz is the odd man out for the same reason. Like I said, I am not married to any format though which is why I am soliciting input.
Just wanted to say that I'll play in whatever tourney you propose, but I leave for OK for Thanksgiving on the 17th. I could potentially play on the 16th (Friday), but chances are slim. Back in town the following Saturday night.
So, in short, do what you want, and I'll play if I can!
And lastly, even though I lose at it, I'd like Razz included.
I understand the one re-buy for full price thing. That I get, it's just for rare instances where two big hands clash early in a tourney.
But add-ons baffle me. To me, if you are a good player and want maximum EV out of a tourney, you HAVE to get as many starting chips as they will let you have. Anybody who doesn't do the add on is at a disadvantage. To me it's a deceptive way to get more money into the pot/casino's pockets. It's like a mini bait and switch. 30.00 tourney? Sure! But then when everyone else at the table adds on, you are basically forced to. I also see issues with multiple table tourney add-ons, in the situation that on one table everyone adds on, and at the other nobody does.
It just seems like you give up a lot just to keep someone from pushing an small amount in out of desperation. I think that it pretty much mitigates itself anyway. If you have so few chips that shoving to rebuy is a good move, then your chips aren't enough to matter anyhow. If you have enough to protect, then you aren't shoving.
Also, for some players (like me), this wouldn't prevent my shoving anyhow, as I view the add-on as a must regardless of stack. I would shove for the rebuy then add-on also.
Thoughts?
I'm with Marsh, I think. Consider the following:
I'm at about half my original buy-in. The cut-off for the re-buy is looming, and there's also an add-on at that cut-off time. Most everyone is going to buy the add-on. It just doesn't make sense not to (Scott winning third without it is a fluke). So, since everybody is adding on, the advantage for the add-on is lost. I'm looking to get my stack as large as possible, and if I can double my stack by either a)going all-in and winning or b)going all-in and losing and rebuying, then I'm going to do that. Doesn't make sense not to.
I think the all-in/rebuy/add-on is the only option in that instance. And I agree with Marshall that it sucks.
No add-on.
Let's bring this post back onto the HERO tournament specifically. The mixed game tourney was never going to have option for a rebuy or add-on due largely to the fact that all games are limit and it would be nearly impossible for a stack to get flattened early in the tournament. I will start a new post about buy/rebuy/add-on issues in general.
Does anyone have any other input regarding this tournament?
I think we have said what we have to say.
Basically you cant make everyone happy, and you shouldn't try. Royal and I want Razz. Ryan and others don't. Jason wants to play full HORSE so he can pretend hes on TV. I don't want to put 40.00-50.00 down on a mixed game tourney. Others would probably like to put even more down.
I think the bottom line for all of us is that you set the terms, and we will decide. For me at least (and I don't think I am alone here), I will probably play no matter what. There are really no deal breakers for me. If you took Razz out, I would still play. If it was 50.00 buy in, I would still play. If you left Razz in, Ryan would play etc.
So why don't you propose your tournament, and if there are any major deal breakers I am sure you will hear about it (above the normal poker player whining).
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody."
-Bill Cosby
Oh, quick thought re: add-ons and their uselessness: I tend to agree with Marshall and Royal on that, but they *could* serve the intended function if it were like cash games: add-ons are only available to players who have less than $X at the end of the rebuy period.
Of course, then it feels "unfair" to those who aren't allowed to add on, but if the point is to prevent people from intentionally trying to go bust, make it cheaper for them to guard their stack and take the add-on as a means to having a real stack after the rebuy rounds have ended.
I've never felt too strongly either way about rebuys vs. no rebuys. I think back in the jtrey tournament days, I usually voted no rebuy, but that was because I liked to go home before 4:30...
I'm a little late to this party, but thoughts on everything:
I agree with Marsh on two fronts, I would like to play Razz and I would like the buy-in to be less than $40. I'll probably play anything though, so it really isn't that big a deal.
As for buy-ins/add-ons, I like having the option of one rebuy early in the tournament. Getting sucked out on and eliminated early sucks, it's nice to have at least a little insurance. You'll still run into the last hand ship it and rebuy situation, but I don't think there's really any getting around that. Maybe if at add-on time you could only add-on enough to get you up to an original buy-in that could work, but if you do that it kind of feels to me like the first part of the tournament was useless and everyone is at least back where they started.
Post a Comment