Tourney Big Blind Ante can't post his blind and the entire ante (3 Viewers)

[Mr Winberg]

the major impact it has on three-handed and (especially) heads-up play.

Here we agree!!

To emulate the individual antes that WSOP had, the size of the BB ante should drop to the size of the SB when 5-3 handed. Heads up is harder, because dropping it further could in theory require bringing back chips that were colored off. We keept it at SB, which means a higher ante cost per hand than with individual antes.

 

[BGinGA]

Well, it does speed up the game!

So does slashing the blind level times in half. And to be totally honest, the time gains are minimal in my experience, at least with players who have a working brain and a decent dealer to properly control the action.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Read the post you missed

Are you refering to short handed play? That's because of poorly implemented BBA (i.e. not reducing it appropriately) rather than the BBA itself.

So does slashing the blind level times in half

Apples to oranges. Slising the levels in half makes the tourney half as long and twice as turboish. Having more hands played per hour keeps the tourney the same length (or a tad shorter) and actually makes it less turboish. Right?

 

[Frogzilla]

And just for the record, I'd be a lot less vocal about having this shoved down our collective throats if the 'powers-that-be' were a little more concerned about the real-world implications of their decisions.

But they poo-poo any valid concerns about the residual effects of the BBA, or ways to help minimize them

But people DO analyze and discuss the other effects of the BBA. To wit:

The relative increase in total ante when short handed is discussed sometimes by poker personalities (like the break desk when they go over the new ante format), and I have hope that TDA adopts a solution. I personally really like your “reduce it to size of small blind” idea. The Heads up 2019 event was the only NLHE tournament at WSOP without a BBA and that is not by accident.

The ante first or big blind first was major topic at TDA is also discussed a lot.

 

[BGinGA]

Obviously the poker community at large is more willing to accept the downsides to speed up the game than you and the people you play with.

Don't hold it against me just because the players in my group are smarter than most.

 

[Mr Winberg]

The relative increase in total ante when short handed is discussed sometimes by poker personalities (like the break desk when they go over the new ante format), and I have hope that TDA adopts a solution.

I am not a smart person, far from it, but the first time I tried BBA (which if I remember correctly was either last winter or fall of 2018) I reduced the size to the SB at 5 handed simply because I assumed the idea was to keep the ante cost per orbit as close to individual antes as possible. I never gave it a second thought. It baffles me that the wsop doen't do this. They must have thought about it? My best guess it that they want to speed up the endgame.

 

[Legend5555]

I am not a smart person, far from it, but the first time I tried BBA (which if I remember correctly was either last winter or fall of 2018) I reduced the size to the SB at 5 handed simply because I assumed the idea was to keep the ante cost per orbit as close to individual antes as possible. I never gave it a second thought. It baffles me that the wsop doen't do this. They must have thought about it? My best guess it that they want to speed up the endgame.

It's the issue of introducing extra rules overhead and the possibility of more mistakes.

 

[Dix]

But they poo-poo any valid concerns about the residual effects of the BBA, or ways to help minimize them -- such as the effective increase in ante cost per level (it can be significant when compared to individual antes for tables with fewer than 10 players), and the major impact it has on three-handed and (especially) heads-up play.

Careful.... pointing out flaws with facts can put some minds on tilt.

 

[Legend5555]

Don't hold it against me just because the players in my group are smarter than most.

I'll take more hands per hour over the rare cases where the downsides have a meaningful effect on things. Besides, if everyone agrees to the BBA, then over time it effects everyone equally.

 

[BGinGA]

But people DO analyze and discuss the other effects of the BBA.

Yeah, but they implemented it anyway, before any of those discussions could be adequately evaluated.. I've said from the beginning that it wasn't ready for prime-time, and they forced it on the players anyway, problems and all. That's no way to run a business, unless you're more concerned about the business than the players. Which this clearly qualifies.

And before Frogzilla jumps in with "BUT THE PLAYERS LOVE IT!", most of them haven't really thought it through -- they primarily only focus on the fact that a) they no longer personally have to worry about posting an ante every hand, and b) the industry con job about so many extra hands now being played per hour with a BBA. They haven't fully appreciated the changes in game play -- the fact that it dramatically speeds up tournaments (meaning not more hands per hour, but fewer hands per tournament, by ending sooner) due to higher per-level costs, and dramatically changing the game play in the ending stages.

And if players were really concerned about getting to play more hands in per hour, they'd be screaming for a shot clock or time cards to minimize the antics of players who unnecessarily tank over trivial decisions, which kills available play time at a rate many times higher than the act of posting individual antes.

 

[BGinGA]

I'll take more hands per hour over the rare cases where the downsides have a meaningful effect on things.

The 'more hands per hour' is trivial, and is offset by the event finishing sooner due to the increased cost-per-level (so actually fewer hands overall). The downsides are real and tangible, and affect every single hand when there are fewer than 10 players, and significantly alters play when three-handed and heads-up.

 

[BGinGA]

It's the issue of introducing extra rules overhead and the possibility of more mistakes.

lol, as opposed to the overhead of the rule that made the other overhead necessary.

 

[Mr Winberg]

due to higher per-level costs

I must have missed something. Apart from the high ante cost when 5 handed or below, what are the higher costs? (I take it you're not referring to that since you followed up with "and dramatically changing the game play in the ending stages").

 

[ekricket]

Just forget about the “ante” designation and make it SB/4xSB for the blinds.

Isn't the point of antes to promote action by increasing pot odds? Doesn't this defeat that purpose? In this scenario, players would be calling 4 to win 5 vs. calling 2 to win 5 using antes.

Since I might anger a lot of members now, I apologize to everyone but here it goes
That would be the same as just having half the SB and halving everyone's stacks. Not the same as having full stacks but dead money in every pot.

Hopefully you both realize that no matter what you call it it amounts to the same thing -
BBA = SB/4xSB

 

[justsomedude]

I must have missed something. Apart from the high ante cost when 5 handed or below, what are the higher costs? (I take it you're not referring to that since you followed up with "and dramatically changing the game play in the ending stages").

I assumed he was referring to the impact of more hands per level. If BBA truly allows for a higher number of hands, then you’ll potentially be the BB more frequently, which means shedding more chips per level via the BBA.

 

[BGinGA]

I must have missed something. Apart from the high ante cost when 5 handed or below, what are the higher costs? (I take it you're not referring to that since you followed up with "and dramatically changing the game play in the ending stages").

It's not just when 5-handed or below -- any time the table is smaller than 10 players, the fixed cost per orbit goes up with a BBA vs individual antes. It's just double at 5-handed, and even worse with fewer than five.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Hopefully you both realize that no matter what you call it it amounts to the same thing -
BBA = SB/4xSB

It's not the same. With your approach the stacks are halved, since to limp you need to bet 4×SB. With BBA I only need to limp with 2×SB. That's a big difference.

SB=100
My stack=8000
You're approach: I limp with 400 (1/20 of my stack) when there's 500 in the pot.
BBA: I limp with 200 (1/40 of my stack) when there's 500 in the pot.

You see the difference, right?

 

[Marius L]

Don't hold it against me just because the players in my group are smarter than most.

I will actually hold it against you to some extent, because it shows that you might be somewhat out of touch with the general poker landscape. I'm sure you are very efficient with chips and handling your stack and the pot if you are the dealer, and I think most of us chip nerds on here are. In a PCF meet up game I would expect people to be able to post antes in a timely manner and I'm sure it wouldn't be that big of a problem. Out there in the poker world though, there are plenty of rec players that has to be reminded about their ante several times pr round, and it gets really tiresome real quick. It is no wonder the poker world has (mostly) happily accepted this change and while yes, technically we are loosing out in some minor aspect of the game, it's 100% worth it IMO. Feel free to keep playing with individual antes in your home game though, if it works just fine there.

 

[BGinGA]

I assumed he was referring to the impact of more hands per level. If BBA truly allows for a higher number of hands, then you’ll potentially be the BB more frequently, which means shedding more chips per level via the BBA.

Also true, but I discount that theoretical increase in cost since the increase in hands played is pretty minimal.

Mostly it's the increased fixed cost per orbit, which is the SB+BB+BBA (vs SB+BB+T(A) if individually-posted antes), where T=table size, and TA typically equals 1 BB when T=10. As the table size decreases, the ante cost per orbit naturally decreases with individually-posted antes, but it does not decrease at all with a BBA. This has two effects: the cost-per-orbit increases, and the game play is altered (due to more dead money in relationship to the blinds).

 

[justsomedude]

It's not just when 5-handed or below -- any time the table is smaller than 10 players, the fixed cost per orbit goes up with a BBA vs individual antes. It's just double at 5-handed, and even worse with fewer than five.

Ah yes... valid point.

For example, a BBA of 500/1000/1000 really only makes sense 10 handed. With 9 or less players, each BBA is higher, on average, than the sum of the individual antes would've been.

 

[BGinGA]

yes, technically we are loosing out in some minor aspect of the game, it's 100% worth it IMO.

The truth is that it's more than just some minor aspect of the game. Have you even read the posts in this thread?

 

[BGinGA]

Hopefully you both realize that no matter what you call it it amounts to the same thing -
BBA = SB/4xSB

Not really. Where the difference really comes into play is the minimum raise amount vs pot size. For a BBA, the minimum raise amount is just 2xBB for a pot size of 5xSB. In your scenario, the minimum raise amount (with the same pot size) is 4xBB for a pot size of 5SB, or dramatically different odds. @Legend5555

 

[Mr Winberg]

It's not just when 5-handed or below -- any time the table is smaller than 10 players, the fixed cost per orbit goes up with a BBA vs individual antes. It's just double at 5-handed, and even worse with fewer than five.

That's just not true!

Check old WSOP ME structures. This one is from 2018:

The ante is steadily between 1/6 and 1/10 of the BB (except the warm-up level 3). 1/6 is equivalent to BBA when 6 handed. 1/8 equivalent to 8 handed etc.

For example at level 6: the orbit cost when 9 handed is 900, but with BBA it's 600.

Sorry, but the claim that cost has gone up (except shorthanded) is just wrong.

 

[BGinGA]

Sorry, but the claim that cost has gone up (except shorthanded) is just wrong.

Not all blind schedules follow the WSOP, nor are all WSOP event schedules the same.. And even the WSOP schedule above shows that sometimes the BBA amount is higher.

 

[Frogzilla]

It's not just when 5-handed or below -- any time the table is smaller than 10 players, the fixed cost per orbit goes up with a BBA vs individual antes. It's just double at 5-handed, and even worse with fewer than five.

We’re in the weeds now which is fine. The 8-10 handed ante size not varying is peanuts to me. And way overshadowed by how much more steady and consistent the antes are. Traditional antes, by virtue of being a multiple of smallest chip in play, will cause some levels to have much bigger variations in ante money:

500/1000 (100 ante): 900 ante or .9bb
600/1200 (200 ante): 1800 ante or 1.5 bb

The ante increased by 100% and 67% faster than the blinds.

 

[BGinGA]

way overshadowed by how much more steady and consistent the antes are.

Not steady and consistent compared to table size.

 

[Mr Winberg]

And even the WSOP schedule above shows that sometimes the BBA amount is higher.

The average BB/ante for the levels with antes (including that puny 25 ante at level three) is about 7.5 for the levels I posted. Edit: without level 3 its 7.3.

If you are playing mostly 8 and 9 handed (which I guess you are at that stage) the cost has gone down. So at least for the ME, you must be happy with this, right?

For the record, IMO an old school ante of 1/10 BB is low. If you're gonna have antes, make em count. I preferred 1/6 to 1/8 before BBA came along.

 

[Frogzilla]

Not steady and consistent compared to table size.

Maybe I just don’t view being a player down the same. To me it’s just a UTG with a 0% VPIP. And because UTG is the tightest position it’s really a nothing-burger. Might even be better to have ante to big blind - the more meaningful ratio- consistent 8 vs 9 vs 10 handed.

 

[abby99]

I agree with @BGinGA.

First, I'm not fond of tournaments and rarely play them, even at meetups. I used to play tournaments all the time (that's all there was at the time) but have always preferred cash games. Unlike many players, I find tournaments to be much more stressful than cash games. Weird, I know.

My thoughts on antes . . .
Tournaments, HE-based flop games: Individual antes preferred. If BBA is required (why?), it makes sense to me that the ante would be equal to the number of players times the individual ante, rounded. This eliminates the concern over the full/short-table issues. If the BB can't cover both, then the ante is paid before posting the BB for reasons derived from stud games. For example, antes in stud games are posted first, followed by the forced bet, the bring (comparable to a blind). I like consistency.

Tournaments with a mix of stud, draw, and flop games: Individual antes. Again, for consistency's sake. Off hand, I can't think of any poker games with both antes and blinds in the same game.

I do like dealer antes in cash games, with everybody dealing exactly once per round. If a player is skipped, then that player deals out of turn. Everybody pays once.

If it's a dealer's choice game with game changes for each hand, I doubt that you'd see many players call a dealer-ante game.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I'll take more hands per hour over the rare cases where the downsides have a meaningful effect on things.

How many hands per hour extra? Especially in the WSOP, where tanking for 3-5 minutes is not uncommon, how does BBA even approach a solution?

Director: "We're getting in only 12 hands per hour, because of the excessive tanking"

TDA: "We will implement the BBA. It's clearly a flawed system where players at a 7 player table pay 22% more in blinds than a 9 player table, and dont even get me started on what happens if a player cant pay a full ante. Discount ante round, for just one guy? he gets less than the full ante if he wins? He doesn't pay an ante? Whatever, it only happens 1% of the time, so if it's the 1 million Big Drop it's only an error rate of $10,000 per game. We will get 12.5 hands per hour though!"

Accountant: "People want more hands per hour? Implement that right away! We have a ton of bullshit millennials that desire instant gratification. Let's get them out of the poker game and back onto the floor! While we're at it, lets throw out that Craps table and replace it with a more-hands-per-hour Bubble Craps table. We need more hands per hour! Weeeeeeee!!!!!!"

Me: