Tourney Button ante (2 Viewers)

Frode789

Frode789

Two Pair
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
279
Reaction score
286
Location
Norway
So we recently starting using button ante in our home games. The main reason why we haven't used antes before, was because of the extra time (ask 9 people to post antes), and having to keep lower denominations in play for a long time. We want antes as it speeds up play and discourages being overly passive.

I haven't seen much said about that here (mostly just BBA), so thought I'd make a thread for it here to share experiences. Button ante is used more in Europe than US, and is for example adopted by Party Poker Live (WSOP Europe etc). As for why we didn't use BBA, that is simple really. We prefer the button, with the best position, having to pay ante for the table, as opposed to the BB position (EP), which also has to post the Big Blind. This is more relevant as the blinds go up, and you start getting short stacks. Also you won't have the problem with what do you do when the BB can't post both ante and his blinds.

Rules:
  • Button posts ante for the whole table. The size of the ante depends on the amount of players at the table:
  • 9-per-table
    • 7-9 Handed, Button Ante = 1 x Big Blind.
    • 3-6 Handed, Button Ante = 1 x Small Blind.
  • There is no Ante when play is Heads Up, nor when the Button is dead (after a hand where the Small Blind player has been eliminated).
 
Last edited:
Frode789 said:
So we recently starting using button ante in our home games. The main reason why we haven't used antes before, was because of the extra time (ask 9 people to post antes), and having to keep lower denominations in play for a long time. We want antes as it speeds up play and discourages being overly passive.

I haven't seen much said about that here (mostly just BBA), so thought I'd make a thread for it here to share experiences. Button ante is used more in Europe than US, and is for example adopted by Party Poker Live (WSOP Europe etc). As for why we didn't use BBA, that is simple really. We prefer the button, with the best position, having to pay ante for the table, as opposed to the BB position (EP), which also has to post the Big Blind. This is more relevant as the blinds go up, and you start getting short stacks.

Rules:
  • Button posts ante for the whole table. The size of the ante depends on the amount of players at the table:
  • 9-per-table
    • 7-9 Handed, Button Ante = 1 x Big Blind.
    • 3-6 Handed, Button Ante = 1 x Small Blind.
  • There is no Ante when play is Heads Up, nor when the Button is dead (after a hand where the Small Blind player has been eliminated).
Click to expand...
If insisting on using a table ante for tournament play, this is by far the absolute best possible variation imo. The only time no ante is posted is because that specific player due to post was knocked out. Nobody gets a free ride.
 
What happens when the button does not have the adequate chips to post both the blind and the ante? Which takes precedent?
 
The button never posts blinds, so no conflict. If he's short on the ante amount, then he's short.
 
OK...I get why people don't want everybody having to throw in an ante when there is not a designated dealer...that makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is, why do so many people insist on having antes for tournaments in the first place? To me, instead of having all these "problems" with antes, just don't have antes. That solves all "problems" and creates no new ones.
 
Gobbs said:
OK...I get why people don't want everybody having to throw in an ante when there is not a designated dealer...that makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is, why do so many people insist on having antes for tournaments in the first place? To me, instead of having all these "problems" with antes, just don't have antes. That solves all "problems" and creates no new ones.
Click to expand...

The single feature of antes is to "induce action." More money in the pot = better odds for worse hands = more money in the pot.

Simple as that.
 
Wils said:
The single feature of antes is to "induce action." More money in the pot = better odds for worse hands = more money in the pot.

Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Any place that the mathematical differences are compared and documented? Surely somebody has done a white paper on this....
 
Disclaimer: big fan of BBA...and as it’s quite similar I also like the button ante.

But in the big blind ante thread, the situations people hated (get knocked out in a chopped pot, win a hand and not win any chips) also exist in the button ante. The only real difference is that there is always a bb every hand, but not so for the button. BBA is clearly superior.
 
BGinGA said:
Any place that the mathematical differences are compared and documented? Surely somebody has done a white paper on this....
Click to expand...

Not a math issue. It’s simply any time there is more dead money in a pot more players will be interested in taking a shot at it.
 
BGinGA said:
The button never posts blinds, so no conflict. If he's short on the ante amount, then he's short.
Click to expand...

This still leads to the same issues in the BBA as @Frogzilla points out. It only means those issues are two hands later. Maybe that is somehow desirable. I like the clarity of separating the ante from the big blind and skipping the ante in a dead button situation does not bother me as I said above.

Frogzilla said:
But in the big blind ante thread, the situations people hated (get knocked out in a chopped pot, win a hand and not win any chips) also exist in the button ante.
Click to expand...

True, the button could be all in for the ante of one chip and would always be out of position in a chop. Even though we are talking about a rare occurrence it would actually happen more often in the button ante than the BBA.

You probably would have to make a rule that splitting the main pot when the button is all in for the ante, chips are awarded to the button first, then clockwise in the event of a tied main pot.

I don't hate either version of BBA or button ante personally.
 
BGinGA said:
Any place that the mathematical differences are compared and documented? Surely somebody has done a white paper on this....
Click to expand...

If not, someone should. It would be "easy" to calculate the theoretical difference based on pot odds, assuming everyone is playing an exactly perfect mathematical game.

Sort of.
 
trigs said:
I've seen cash games with antes. I've played some ante cash games on pokerstars. I've never played one live though.
Click to expand...

I almost edited it to read "seldom", but they are so incredibly rare, where antes in tournaments are incredibly common. So the "induces action" reasoning fall flat (unless cash game players hate action, and tournament players relish it).
 
DoubleEagle said:
Not a math issue. It’s simply any time there is more dead money in a pot more players will be interested in taking a shot at it.
Click to expand...
lol, of course it's a math issue. If antes (dead money) induce or promote action, then it stands to reason that the amount of dead money (or ante'd amounts) have a relationship to that action. Differing sizes of antes should induce different levels of 'interest', and affect both what starting hands and what stack sizes (and combinations thereof) will be going after it.

To say it's not a math issue is silly. Under that reasoning, ~any~ amount of dead money would generate the same level of interest -- rather it be a single small-blind's worth total, or a big blind donated by every player each time to the dead money pool -- and that is clearly not the case.

The numbers used/involved matter, and have a mathematical relationship to optimum play.
 
It seems that every discussion of a table ante (BBA or button ante) devolves into "what's the point of antes?" If you don't like antes, don't use antes in your home games. It is mathematically inarguable that the presence of antes changes the pot odds for action. You can argue as to whether that change is beneficial, or even effective in inducing action. But folks who run tournaments for a living (directors of all major and regional series I am aware of) have apparently determined that antes serve a purpose in their events, since they all use them.

For me (and I may be in the minority), there is some value to playing a home tournament in a similar format to what you see in major tournaments. So that when I go play the half-dozen or so "real" tournaments I might play in a given year, I'm in familiar territory. But I recognize that may not be important to everyone.

As to why antes aren't used as much in cash games, from the cardroom's perspective there isn't the same interest in facilitating action (i.e., busting people out) as a director has in running a tournament. The best thing for a cardroom is to keep the games running and collect rake. There is marginal interest in making pots bigger (where the rake is progressive), but usually only up to a certain point because rake in most places is capped. Making players go broke can actually kill the game. But I'm sure there's also a certain amount of inertia/tradition in the fact that NLH cash games don't typically use antes while tournaments do.
 
Poker Zombie said:
I almost edited it to read "seldom", but they are so incredibly rare, where antes in tournaments are incredibly common. So the "induces action" reasoning fall flat (unless cash game players hate action, and tournament players relish it).
Click to expand...

I'd argue that the inherent nature of a "tournament life" in and of itself will drive tournament play to be less action heavy than cash, on average.
 
fieldsy said:
It seems that every discussion of a table ante (BBA or button ante) devolves into "what's the point of antes?"
/snip/
It is mathematically inarguable that the presence of antes changes the pot odds for action. You can argue as to whether that change is beneficial, or even effective in inducing action.
/snip/
Click to expand...
Well, not every discussion. :)

Regarding your second point, I agree that the math changes with antes added, and theoretically should alter optimum play. I'm interested in to what degree it changes with varying levels of dead money involved, and to what degree those varying levels have on optimum play strategies, in terms of relative stack size, hand strength, and position.

Any thoughts or knowledge of prior research in those areas?
 
It is clearly true that antes change pot odds and increase action. It is also clearly true that they slow down the game to some extent. The decision as to whether or not they are "good" for a tournament is a value judgement as to how much more action is generated relative to how many fewer hands are played over time. If your players are more experienced, or if you have a dedicated dealer you might reach a decision than you would in a self-dealt home tournament with a bunch of casual players.

One player posting antes - BB, Button, whoever - would decrease the effect of slowing down the game without effecting action (compared to traditional, every-player antes). It would remain a value judgement as to if it ends up being good or bad for the tournament. I've never played with a button ante, but I like the idea better than traditional antes for a home game without a dedicated dealer.

L
 
Poker Zombie said:
I almost edited it to read "seldom", but they are so incredibly rare, where antes in tournaments are incredibly common. So the "induces action" reasoning fall flat (unless cash game players hate action, and tournament players relish it).
Click to expand...

Except there is a key difference...tournaments you are trying to outlast people. You get paid more to lose all your chips after 8 hours vs after 2 hours in a tournament, in a cash game you don’t. This is formalized with ICM, but most people agree that you should tighten up in tournaments, all else equal. Antes help offset those effects which solely exist in tournaments
 
Frogzilla said:
Except there is a key difference...tournaments you are trying to outlast people. You get paid more to lose all your chips after 8 hours vs after 2 hours in a tournament, in a cash game you don’t. This is formalized with ICM, but most people agree that you should tighten up in tournaments, all else equal. Antes help offset those effects which solely exist in tournaments
Click to expand...

I do not disagree that players should play somewhat tighter in a tournament.

A super tight player (only plays QQ or better) in a tournament though, will eventually be swallowed by the increasing blinds. Hence there is already an incentive to loosen up. The same player in a cash game has zero incentive (other than it would be boring as hell), but the ante is uncommon in cash.

If the goal of the ante is to increase action in a tournament, I would think a blind in a cash game would do the same.
 
Poker Zombie said:
If antes are so great for "inducing action", why don't cash games use antes?
Click to expand...
Along a similar line of thought....

To promote more action (and knock out short stacks quicker), why not use a BigBlindAnte ~and~ a ButtonAnte. That will really get the tight-ass players swinging at those big dead-money pots. :D

Seriously though, still looking for a mathematical analysis that shows the degree of effectiveness of antes using varying amounts, and to what degree how having a single player post (whether in good position or bad) affects action vs single-player antes. Call it due diligence, best done before making widespread changes based on what appears to be guesswork. Doesn't have to be data-based, either -- even a theoretical exercise would be better than nothing at all.
 
BGinGA said:
Seriously though, still looking for a mathematical analysis that shows the degree of effectiveness of antes using varying amounts, and to what degree how having a single player post (whether in good position or bad) affects action vs single-player antes. Call it due diligence, best done before making widespread changes based on what appears to be guesswork. Doesn't have to be data-based, either -- even a theoretical exercise would be better than nothing at all.
Click to expand...
I think the literature is probably more developed with respect to antes in general than for with big-blind ante or button ante in particular. I think there is some discussion of how antes change incentives in Harrington on Modern Tournament Poker (among other poker books). A few quick online resources would be these:
https://upswingpoker.com/poker-antes-tournament-raising-strategy/
https://fcnp.com/2008/01/09/daniel-negreanu-on-poker-the-ante-effect/
I've said this in BBA discussion threads, but basically I think antes increase the incentive to steal the blinds/antes and they increase the incentive to defend the BB. Think of the 100/200 level. With no antes, a late-position raiser opening the pot to 500 is risking 500 chips to win 300 (get paid 3:5 if everyone folds). The BB has to call 300 to win 800 (8:3 odds assuming no further action). If there is a BBA/button ante of 200 (or 8 25-chip individual antes), there are 500 chips in the pot. The late raiser to 500 gets paid 1:1 if everyone folds. The player in the BB gets 10:3 to call the raise. Obviously, there are issues that grow out of that, for example: the raiser knows he or she will get called with a wider range by the BB; good players who recognize the incentive to raise with a wider range should 3-bet a wider range, because they know the raiser will have more hands that can't continue under pressure and to give the BB a worse price to stay in; players may adjust bet sizing to account for the ridiculous pot odds the BB is getting to call a raise, etc. But I think all that adds up to antes creating more incentives for players to get involved with pots, which means more chances of people going bust.

In theory, if a BBA or button ante is equal to what the sum of individual antes would be at the same blind level, the incentives and "optimal" play should be identical with table ante versus traditional antes. After all, that table ante is dead money, it's not a live bet. In practice, I think there is a good chance that many players psychologically still view the table ante they posted as "their" money to lose. So I would surmise that players likely defend their BB at a higher rate in BBA tournaments than in traditional ante tournaments (although the BB already gets good pot odds to defend in any single-raised pot with traditional antes). And I would likewise think that the player on the button, who has the advantage of position, may be even more likely to play hands in button-ante tournaments than in traditional antes. But again, those are two positions that already have pretty good incentives to play hands, so I think the effect is likely marginal.
 
Antes in a multi table tournament are everything, I understand for convenience sake eliminating them in a small home game, 1-2 tables, but in an any larger event they are essential. They make pots worth fighting for and are central to any half decent tournament player's overall strategy. Entire books have been written on why antes are essential in MTTs, I don't need to rehash all the reasons here, suffice it to say - and I've said it before - anyone who thinks that antes are optional or expendable or superfluous in a tournament is someone I really, really, really want to play with.
 
Chris Manzoni said:
Entire books have been written on why antes are essential in MTTs
Click to expand...

How many of 'em are right?

:p

"anyone who thinks that antes are optional or expendable or superfluous in a tournament is someone I really, really, really want to play with."

You're getting confused between "liking antes" and "playing an ante game well."

There's a big difference.
 
Poker Zombie said:
If antes are so great for "inducing action", why don't cash games use antes?
Click to expand...

trigs said:
I've seen cash games with antes. I've played some ante cash games on pokerstars. I've never played one live though.
Click to expand...

It hard to get details on higher stakes games other than what is televised but I am guessing this where they are more common, like "High Stakes Poker," "Poker After Dark," and more recently "Live at the Bike."

I remember HSP being my first exposure to consolidating antes. IIRC, they were playing 400-800 with the button ante of 800 for the table.
 
Last edited:

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!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

B
Tourney Ante structure
Replies
18
Views
366
BPTDirector
BPTDirector
M
Tourney Big Blind ante
Replies
2
Views
213
Mixalot
Mixalot
D
Tourney STT BBA
2
Replies
39
Views
829
ekricket
ekricket
L
Tourney BB vs BBA: Different players posting?
Replies
5
Views
430
Preditor
Preditor
Ryuzumei
Tourney T100-Base or T500-Base? and feedback on current structure and breakdown
Replies
10
Views
543
FearlessFred
FearlessFred
Back
Top Bottom