Tourney Bringing tourneys to a close when they overrun (1 Viewer)

[Wils]

So had an odd one last night. Format was 2 very quick 2 hour freeze-outs (this was very casual), 5 players with 5000 chips. Game should have finished round the 2 hour mark, when there were just 20 big blinds on the table, but instead when it went heads up, there was a protracted "blind swapping" exercise where both players obviously wanted to win, but neither were getting even semi-decent cards.

The game ended when there just 8 BB's on the table, at roughly 2h 45 minutes. Never seen anything like it.

I should point out that this format *usually* finishes at or about the 2 hour mark, so it's not like the blind levels/times are screwed.

So... When this happens, what options are available to bring things to a head? Would you jump a couple of blind levels, speed the blinds up, introduce a BB ante? Sudden death? Say whoever has most chips after a certain time wins?

Or would you just let it continue?

(PS thanks to responses in another thread, I realise BB Antes are usually dropped altogether when the numbers of players is reduced down to 3 (or close), but I was just considering it as a last resort).

Open to any suggestions, as last night's nice and quick format became a looong drag (because exactly the same thing happened in the second game too!)

 

[Eriks]

Equity chop when it’s down to heads-up is a way I’ve used

 

[LotsOfChips]

Whatever route you decide to take, make sure that your players know the rules before the game starts.

You could do something like set a hard end time, with a mandatory chop when the timer goes off. ICM or simply higher stack takes first place.

Or you could modify your blind structure before the game so that the blinds go up steeper after the projected end level. If the BB is 25% of remaining chips, the game is going to end pretty quickly.

 

[Mr Winberg]

Or would you just let it continue?

This!

Unless you have:

make sure that your players know the rules before the game starts.

The last times I hosted multiple turbos in a single night I enforced this:

Equity chop when it’s down to heads-up is a way I’ve used

in all but the last tourney. That way people didn't have to wait as long for the next tournament.

 

[Saxplayer]

I mean, if your table doesn't agree to a chop at a certain point in time there really is no way to avoid this entirely. If both parties want to win, blinds are large, and no one is catching cards its call / fold for a long period of time. It's not really great heads up play - but not everyone is a great heads up player

I'd poll your group and if largely, people didn't like that happening - then the solution is a time limit then auto-chop.

 

[merkong]

Cash games. Problem solved.

 

[BGinGA]

Dunno what your blind structure looks like, but if wanting to keep things close to 2 hours, I'd implement 10-minute levels with 100% increases starting at the 2-hour mark, with an option of an equity chop if all remaining players agree to it.

Almost guaranteed it won't ever reach 2:45 again, and likely not even 2:15 ...

 

[ArielVer18]

neither were getting even semi-decent cards.

Good chance the last two players didn't know what semi-decent cards look like. The reason no-ante tournaments are expected to end by the time there are 20 big blinds on the table is because players are too shallow for any meaningful post-flop play. Were they limping to see the flop and not wanting to shove unless one player had two pair or better?

 

[Poker Zombie]

The structure can be easily drawn up to include 100% blind increases when you get into "overtime".

My games are designed to wrap up between 11:30pm and Midnight. The structure retains the same progression used all evening until 12:15, then it's all 100% jumps. This isn't even unusual. Take a look at the Sahara Las Vegas Schedule:

It's not exactly all 100% increases, but the "sixes" from levels 4 and 9 are mysteriously missing at levels 14 and 18.

 

[Wils]

Dunno what your blind structure looks like, but if wanting to keep things close to 2 hours, I'd implement 10-minute levels with 100% increases starting at the 2-hour mark, with an option of an equity chop if all remaining players agree to it.

Almost guaranteed it won't ever reach 2:45 again, and likely not even 2:15 ...

I've gone for uniformity with the blinds - and no doubt ripped off one of your suggested schedules in the process

25-50
25-75
50-100
75-150
100-200
150-300
200-400
300-600
400-800
500-1000
700-1500
1000-2000

Successive blinds are 10x the previous 7th level. This gives blind increases of 50% then 33% then 50% and so on, the only difference being a 25% jump from 800 to 1000.

So the next game, I think I'll go for shorter blind levels (10 minutes) all the way through and bigger stacks (200 BB rather than 100). I know that sounds counter-intuitive BUT bigger blinds = more room for manoeuvre = more play, and shorter blinds = a greater sense of urgency.

This has the same effect as doubling the blinds from hour 2 onwards, in that there are only 6 total BB on the table at the 2:30 mark either way.

 

[Wils]

Good chance the last two players didn't know what semi-decent cards look like. The reason no-ante tournaments are expected to end by the time there are 20 big blinds on the table is because players are too shallow for any meaningful post-flop play. Were they limping to see the flop and not wanting to shove unless one player had two pair or better?

They're good players. One was trying to win to keep his stats up I think, and the other was new to the group so wanted to make a good impression. Usually well before that point someone has won, or we chop, but not this time.

I think this has exposed a flaw in my structure which I'm taking steps to address (deets in the post above).