Tourney Matt Savage’s recent blog post on big blind antes (2 Viewers)

The problem they are trying to fix (I think) is the slow-down caused by ANTEs (which is real if players aren't at the table and/or if the dealer is inexperienced)...you could pretty easily argue that the BBA at least makes positive progress toward that issue. No?
I wouldn't call it positive progress when it also introduces new problems that were previously nonexistent. It's a sideways step, at best. At worst, it creates inequities where none previously existed.
 
Two hands per hour is a very fair estimate of the difference between traditional antes and big blind antes. Two hands! Seems insignificant to me.
But I like antes and Ive seen just barely enough ante issues that I’m ready to try the big blind ante thing, as alternative.
Antes go smoothly enough the majority of the time. But sometimes you get that one person who fails EVERY time. Usually it’s a stoned kid, or some twat (male or female) who’s fully engaged with their phone. I do like @WedgeRock suggestion that there should be some punishment for those morons. But it’s not realistic. So let’s give the bba a try.
 
Seems to me that the BBA actually allows us to win more chips before we "ante out" of the tournament. Is that not true? If I'm thinking incorrectly, can someone help explain?

You are absolutely right. This is what I was trying to say above in many more words. Other than whoever draws the big blind in the initial draw, every stack is slightly larger than it otherwise ould be

And until somebody comes up with a flawless solution, it shouldn't be crammed down players' throats, to fix a nonexistent problem.

I don't think saving 2-3 hands an hour is insignificant.

That said, I think the button ante is better for a couple reasons.

1) The Big Blind is always paid before the ante and is always separate.
2) It deemphasizes the importance of the initial seat draw, or who has the big blind at the outset of each new level.
3) I see skipping the ante in dead button situations as a feature, not a bug. (This mitigates the advantage of the player before the button effectively getting last action twice.)

All that said I don't find the BB version inherently unfair either, no do I find it unfair to pay the ante first means for one hand only that player can win the ante only if during the rest of the orbit, the player can win the entire ante even if unable to match the total Just take advantage of the situation and plan your move-ins sooner if you find yourself in this spot.

As for the single chip question, I'm guessing they could make some rule to prevent that single chip elimination horror scenario. They already have such a rule to prevent elimination if someone loses a draw for odd chips.
 
I'm guessing they could make some rule to prevent that single chip elimination horror scenario.

Why switch to a rule that requires creation of new rules to clarify the rules? If the problem is the players, address the players, do not address the rules.

And like @BGinGA says, if you don't want the problems that come with antes, eliminate them from the structure altogether.
 
I think I overall prefer BBA, but I did have one of these odd scenarios happen to me in a Wynn 1K tournament this summer.

I had 12K chips left after losing a large hand at 3K/6K blinds. I posted the 6K ante, and the 6K big blind. Somehow, it ends up folding to the SB who completes the 3K and I am all in. We turn over our hands.

18K in the pot.
I have K7
SB has Q7

Flop: 753
Turn: 5
River: 5

We chopped the pot and I received 9K chips back. The table, including myself, laughed at my misfortune. I was knocked out shortly after.

Yes, weird situations will happen, but overall my experience with BBA is a positive one despite the above hand.
 
As a former dealer and longtime player I am still a little apprehensive about it. I have played in this format a couple of times and agree that it can speed the pace up for low buy in tournaments in your local casino. The donkey fest that regularly occurs in those tournaments slows down the game when the antes are in place. So I think it helps in that aspect. But with higher buy in tournaments generally the players are of respectable caliber. Which with an ante involved doesn't slow down the pace enough for me to justify the bba.
 
This whole concept seems pointless. If you don't want antes, don't have them.

Personally, I'd like to see forced straddles instead of having a particular seat do the antes. Hell, that's pretty much what a BB is already since the SB can be viewed as just a bring-in. Call it the "jumbo blind"and start it at level 5.
 
This whole concept seems pointless. If you don't want antes, don't have them.

Personally, I'd like to see forced straddles instead of having a particular seat do the antes. Hell, that's pretty much what a BB is already since the SB can be viewed as just a bring-in. Call it the "jumbo blind"and start it at level 5.

The beauty of the BBA structures is that the structure is slower, at least the Aria High Rollers. Your suggestion speeds the structure up. If that is your goal, than you found your solution.
 
Big blind ante is here to stay, traditional antes will be gone within a few years. It’s far too popular and there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle.

I wouldn't be so bold as to make such a prediction.

I am not a big fan of the BBA. Why not have the Button post the ante? Or UTG? Several casinos in Atlantic Canada are using a Button ante and so is Binions.
 
i final tabled a deep stack wsop tourney that used the BB Ante structure i liked it a lot in the early stages however once you hit near the end where everyone was super short due to such huge BB+ante it became a crap shoot, we ended up chopping 6 ways because of such
 
Because 3 extra hands and hour is a big deal.
Why not cut out blinds altogether? That might get a few extra hands per hour? Or pre-deal the next hand before the current hand ends? That might get more hands per hour.

A few more hands per hour, even if true, is not a justification for all the additional problems caused, IMO.
 
Ok, I dont get it, people are saying the BBA brings additional problems. Problems, plural?? All I've heard is the one issue where a player cant cover both BB + BBA, and that is an edge case, at best. Will very rarely happen. And the only player in this thread who has actually experienced it still thinks the BBA was a positive experience.

The issue with it screwing short stacks has been disproven.

The BBA solves several problems (plural), brings several improvements (plural), and only 1 very minor problem.
 
Why not cut out blinds altogether? That might get a few extra hands per hour? Or pre-deal the next hand before the current hand ends? That might get more hands per hour.

I don't think these are ideas devoid of additional problem.

Cutting out blinds seems to assume pots would be seeded by ante, which is already the slow part, and ante only pots take longer because more players stay in longer. (Particulary pots without pf action.)

Predealing hands seems to be a recipe for premature exposure. With will result in more floor calls.

I mean I get it, my instinct that BBA was grossly unfair when I first heard of it, but the more I've read and understood the more it makes sense.

In my mind the only issue that could derail it would be how punitive it seems when the levels change. Being first to post big in a single ante format after a level change is annoying, but at least everyone else is paying along, if on the hook for the BB and ante it's twice as annoying. It's still reasonably random, but worth mentioning imo.

Otherwise we're down to edge casesimo that can be handled by simple rules that will rarely be needed
 
And the only player in this thread who has actually experienced it still thinks the BBA was a positive experience.
Well, that's certainly false. I've played in many table ante events, and I think it's far from being a positive experience.

I've ran antes-only tournaments, where there were no blinds ar all -- so no double-whammy on posting the BB/BBA -- and 100% of the players preferred posting individual antes over posting a rotating table ante, regardless of position (FTA or Button). Not a single player thought it was worth any potential gain in speed or simplicity.

Several players thought it was a good idea prior to the event, and changed their minds after having actually played using it. The only person in the entire room who liked it was one (but not both) of the dedicated dealers.

Just because it's getting a lot of press doesn't mean it's popular.
 
Big blind ante is here to stay, traditional antes will be gone within a few years. It’s far too popular and there’s no putting the genie back in the bottle.

The truth is the WSOP is the biggest brand in Tournament Poker and it's already reached them. The WPT is next. I don't think they're jeopardizing their properties over this unless the benefits outweighed the issues with the previous implementations of this.

Maybe this will just be a major series thing, but I wouldn't be surprised if I see this in my club by the time @Chris Manzoni is saying.
 
At a certain point we end up talking in circles about this. Once we have all explained our arguments in favor of/in opposition to the BBA, people are either persuaded or they aren't. On one hand, I think it's a good idea for any tournament player to have some experience with the BBA, if only because it has caught on with alarming speed in 2018. If you play a NLH tournament in Las Vegas for $300+ these days, I think the BBA is probably now the majority rule (thinking specifically of The Venetian, Wynn, and Aria having adopted it in their tournament series), whereas a year ago I don't think it was really being used anywhere except the High Rollers. So be aware of it, study its strengths and weaknesses and be prepared to make adjustments to your game if you're playing those events. The actual gameplay changes very little most of the time, but be ready for the spots in which it is different.

But if you're running a home game, which I think is the primary focus here, do what you like. I've run my home tournaments with the BBA and it has been well-received. Other PCF players have apparently had a different experience. Different strokes for different folks. If you play enough that you're comfortable "experimenting" with it, try it once and see if your group likes it. No one is going to force you. I know there are people on this forum who have played limit games for 30-40 years and never got into NLH despite the boom because they don't like it. And good for them. If you prefer no-ante tournaments, go for it. If you prefer traditional ante, by all means, play your game.
 
I doubt they will actually mandate it, but they will probably put the rules in place needed to make its implementation optional.
Agree, I don't think they will mandate it, that's not really how the TDA Rules are structured. They are agnostic as to the use of antes at all. The most interesting thing to watch will be whether TDA takes a position in the blind first/ante first debate for short all ins.
 
Just curious if anyone's thoughts change on this when used in a cash game vs. tournament.

I don't mind a single player anteing for the entire table in a cash game, but in what little experience I have with it, I prefer it to be posted by the button. I don't have strong feelings any particular way, though.
 
Just curious if anyone's thoughts change on this when used in a cash game vs. tournament.

I don't mind a single player anteing for the entire table in a cash game, but in what little experience I have with it, I prefer it to be posted by the button. I don't have strong feelings any particular way, though.

If cash games use the forward moving button rule (instead of the dead button rule used in tournaments) there really would never be an issue in having the button post.

I remember "High Stakes Poker" was the first and I ever heard of using the button ante, guess that was about 10 years ago.
 
Just curious if anyone's thoughts change on this when used in a cash game vs. tournament.

I don't mind a single player anteing for the entire table in a cash game, but in what little experience I have with it, I prefer it to be posted by the button. I don't have strong feelings any particular way, though.
I've never played with antes in a NLH cash game and have no intent to start. I don't think there is the same interest in facilitating action in a cash game as there is in tournament administration. Cash games have their own unique rules that tournaments can't use, like straddles, or prop bets like the 2-7 game in a home game. I have read that some of the high-stakes mixed games that incorporate big-bet games use antes in NL, but I haven't seen it at any modest stakes. If you were to use it, I think button ante is probably fine as long as you have a plan in place for bust outs (whether it's no ante on the dead button or a forward-moving button).
 
For a tournament where an ante is introduced in a later round...
Thoughts on pros and cons for a BBA vs just increasing the BB amount to equal BB + BBA?
 
For a tournament where an ante is introduced in a later round...
Thoughts on pros and cons for a BBA vs just increasing the BB amount to equal BB + BBA?
This is a good question. It's mathematically a different dynamic, so depends on what you want to encourage. You're talking about dead money versus a live bet. For example, for antes at a 400/800 level, if you add a BBA for 800 (or traditional antes of 100 at an 8-handed table) that means the cost of an orbit is 2000 chips. With a no-ante structure, to have similar stack depth you would either be at 600/1200 (1800 chips per orbit) or 700/1400 (2100 chips per orbit). If you just add what the ante would be to the BB, you get a BB of 1600. I'm not sure if you're asking about having the SB remain at 400 (400/1600) or adjust the SB accordingly (800/1600).

With antes at this level (BBA or 8 traditional antes), a player can raise to as little as 1600 to take down the 2000 chips in the pot. That's a bet of only 80% of the chips one stands to win. And facing a min-raise, the BB is getting at least 4.5:1 to defend the BB depending on whether there are other calls. With no antes (using 700/1400 as an example, but the ratios are always the same), a player would have to raise to at least 2800 to take down the 2100 chips in the pot. So the bet is 133% of the chips to be won. And the BB now only gets 3.5:1 to defend the BB. There is mathematically more incentive both to raise and to call when there are antes in play.

If you are suggesting just adding the BBA portion to the big blind without adjusting the small blind, e.g., 400/1600, now a player has to raise to 3200 chips to win the 2000 chips in the pot. So the bet has to be 160% of the chips to be won. And the BB now only gets 3.25:1 to defend.

Of course, some players will raise and call with any of these options. And in a tournament there is always the upward pressure of the blinds to incentivize players to play hands. But the range of hands that thinking players should be playing is wider with an ante structure, so it's up to you whether that's something that you want to encourage.
 
Just curious if anyone's thoughts change on this when used in a cash game vs. tournament.

I don't mind a single player anteing for the entire table in a cash game, but in what little experience I have with it, I prefer it to be posted by the button. I don't have strong feelings any particular way, though.
A table ante (usually the button) works great in cash game variants that use antes -- stud, razz, etc. -- but few cash hold'em games use antes.
 
yes, I was referencing keeping the SB the same, so the BB is effectively covering the ante size as a BBA or increased BB amount.
I think I was mostly curious if one would increase action or speed vs the other. My thought is less players per hand with an increased BB due to the actual live bet size... though in later stages of a tournament, just not sure if that would be true.
 
Well, that's certainly false. I've played in many table ante events, and I think it's far from being a positive experience.

Uuum, I was clearly not saying everyone enjoys BBA, I have read the thread o_O The context there was the issue where the BB cant cover BB + BBA. @ohikthxbye mentioned in this thread that it happened to him, and he still liked BBA. So no, not false :)

I've ran antes-only tournaments, where there were no blinds ar all -- so no double-whammy on posting the BB/BBA -- and 100% of the players preferred posting individual antes over posting a rotating table ante, regardless of position (FTA or Button). Not a single player thought it was worth any potential gain in speed or simplicity.

Several players thought it was a good idea prior to the event, and changed their minds after having actually played using it. The only person in the entire room who liked it was one (but not both) of the dedicated dealers.

Just because it's getting a lot of press doesn't mean it's popular.

It's getting alot of press, mainly BECAUSE it's popular. The players in your game really go against the grain here apparently, since the feedback from players elsewhere have been very positive.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom