Tourney $1,000,000 Buy-in STT (1 Viewer)

[Geremie]

Looking to create a $1M buy-in STT for my group. They want a high roller buy-in tournament but like a flat payout structure.

What do you think of the following prize pool?

1st - $1,000,130
2nd - $1,000,060
3rd - $1,000,020
4th - $1,000,000
5th - $999,990
6th - $999,980
7th - $999,970
8th - $999,960
9th - $999,950
10th - $999,940

 

[THRA5H3R]

I hate this.

 

[umbkcshah]

Seems great. I'll host. PP F&F of course. Don't mind me...I'm just going to the Cayman's...I mean bathroom.

 

[davislane]

 

[BGinGA]

$21 EBI? (effective buy-in) Or $1,000,000 buy-in using a credit line?

May be easier to run a 10-player event with $1,000,120 for 1st.

edit: nevermind. I hate this too.

2nd edit: I think it works fine if everybody throws in 20 bucks and it pays top three. But that $60 deficit for 10th is weird.

 

[Geremie]

Top 4 would be able to claim that they have over $1M in tournament winnings

 

[BGinGA]

Actually, this thread has opened my eyes to an entirely new entry/payout concept, which happens to align more closely (but certainly not entirely) with cash game play. The worse you finish, the more it costs you to play, and the higher you finish, the less it costs to play (and at some point on the scale, it costs $0 plus you also make a profit).

For example..... using your payout scale above (minus the mythical $1M component), I see nothing wrong with last place paying $60 into the prize pool, with 9th paying $50, 8th paying $40, etc. decreasing as the finishing spot gets higher with 4th through 1st paying $0 towards the prize pool (which is distributed to the top 3 players). You pay your applicable entry fee when you are eliminated.

Provided it is known / understood / publicized beforehand, it's merely another form of a "poker contest", but one where your finishing position dictates your gain/loss for the event, rather than it being predetermined that the last "X" finishers would all lose (pay) the same amount.

It could be a tourney payout format more inticing to cash players, especially if the format was not as flat as the example above.

Interested to hear opinions from other tourney (and cash game) organizers. @Poker Zombie etc.

 

[Poker Zombie]

The head reels a little bit at the idea of being felted and then having to pay the entry fee, but a $60 buy-in with everybody except last getting paid in a freezeout would work.

It may change tournament strategies too. It is not unusual in tournament play to shove often to make 1st in top-heavy structures. A typical STT $60 buy-in you are risking $60 to win $300 with a shove. With this new structure you are risking $60 to make $130, but your risk drops as players are eliminated.

I would not like it for MTTs though. I don't like to award different championship/player of the year points beyond the first table because table 3 just may have a draw of the toughest players, making their ability to ladder-up more difficult than the other tables. It would also benefit "stallers" in a MTT. Every misdeal or other innocent stall tactic reduces your risk.

I'd be happy to try this in a STT though.

 

[surfik]

Looking to create a $1M buy-in STT for my group. They want a high roller buy-in tournament but like a flat payout structure.

What do you think of the following prize pool?

1st - $1,000,130
2nd - $1,000,060
3rd - $1,000,020
4th - $1,000,000
5th - $999,990
6th - $999,980
7th - $999,970
8th - $999,960
9th - $999,950
10th - $999,940

GTFO!!!

 

[Frogzilla]

How about a million dong tournament with a normal prize pool

A million dongs are about 40-45 USD

 

[ovo]

How about a million dong tournament with a normal prize pool

A million dongs are about 40-45 USD

great, now I can't get a million Dongs out of my head

 

[JustinInMN]

Actually, this thread has opened my eyes to an entirely new entry/payout concept, which happens to align more closely (but certainly not entirely) with cash game play. The worse you finish, the more it costs you to play, and the higher you finish, the less it costs to play (and at some point on the scale, it costs $0 plus you also make a profit).

For example..... using your payout scale above (minus the mythical $1M component), I see nothing wrong with last place paying $60 into the prize pool, with 9th paying $50, 8th paying $40, etc. decreasing as the finishing spot gets higher with 4th through 1st paying $0 towards the prize pool (which is distributed to the top 3 players). You pay your applicable entry fee when you are eliminated.

I was thinking about this the other day as well, and that the bubble is so dramatic because the tournament culture has well established that the lowest prizes should always be greater than the buy in. So the prize pool has this effect of going zero-to-min-cash, and then more subtle increases until the final finishers. But why should at be?

Why not make the minimum prize 25% of the buy in for example and pay more places? Then the bubble is far less dramatic than min-cash or nothing. Players commonly make bubble deals.

to look at the example above, it's effectively a $60 buy in with the following payout. (Which I get is the joke )
10th - $0
9th - $10
8th - $20
7th - $30
6th - $40
5th - $50
4th - $60
3rd - $80
2nd - $120
1st - $190

 

[JustinInMN]

Looking to create a $1M buy-in STT for my group. They want a high roller buy-in tournament but like a flat payout structure.

What do you think of the following prize pool?

1st - $1,000,130
2nd - $1,000,060
3rd - $1,000,020
4th - $1,000,000
5th - $999,990
6th - $999,980
7th - $999,970
8th - $999,960
9th - $999,950
10th - $999,940

My guess is you will be taking a lot of markers for $999,900 .

 

[bergs]

How about a million dong tournament with a normal prize pool

A million dongs are about 40-45 USD

If anyone would know the going price for a dong, it’s Froggy.

(I tried to resist. I really did.)

 

[BGinGA]

It may change tournament strategies too.

Absolutely. Any time the payout structure is extremely flat, or extremely top-heavy, or with excessively large pay jumps -- it will (or should) alter the optimum play strategy.

Why not make the minimum prize 25% of the buy in for example and pay more places?

Only valid reason I can see is the one above -- it will/could alter strategy. But if that's not a concern, then nothing wrong with the concept imo.

 

[Frogzilla]

If the players are competent, it should play out like a final table. Not the worst tournament by any stretch, but you would see a lot of mid stack tightening.

Most leagues that I’ve seen award points in a very similar way, that’s what it reminds me of