Handling a Tourney that becomes a Turbo (1 Viewer)

[Ellasdaddy]

Played 8 handed last night with a few friends and planned a 4-5hr structure with 50bb stacks. We were down to the final two players in an hour and 20 mins. We were only in level 4 when it ended. My question is how would the experienced hosts here handle this? I want to be prepared if there’s a next time...

I was in total disbelief at the rapid action, which I had never witnessed in one of my games or gatherings before. There was only one truly monster hand shown down also, quads over a small straight, so the action came on a few total bluffs and some awfully weak hands played in mindboggling fashion. One of the larger pots was a flopped pair of 4s vs a turned pair of 6s on a board with K Q J. I was stunned it made it to showdown with the bet sizing involved. I also saw raisers check-fold to min bets. I should’ve anticipated play like this as a prepared host, but the table ran very smoothly otherwise and the guys are fairly well-versed in play and decorum. The actual card play was unbelievable though. I felt badly because my friends were no longer at the table an hour into our day together. I wanted to play cash in the first place, but every soul I know feels a stigma about playing cash.

So I was 3rd stack remaining in this game and suggested a chop to get on to the next game quickly and got told that I was only suggesting it bc I was 3rd stack. I explained that the current structure was not meant to support heads up play really and would take forever to play out. I wasn’t worried about win/loss. I never am. I also suggested playing it out but decreasing the level times going forward and was then told that I was suggesting this because I wasn’t winning like usual... So we let it roll and in level 4 I won. I no longer felt good though.

Second game starts, runs much longer with more conservative ABC play, and I win again. Still didn’t feel good. Now I question hosting in the future, or just hosting these people because I was unprepared.

 

[Chris Manzoni]

50 B.B. starting stacks will not ever get you a 4-5 hour tournament with 8 people. With those numbers you’re looking at 2 hours max. My single table tournaments start with 400 big blinds and have a standard structure based on the WSOP with a couple of the flatter levels removed (250-500, 1200-2400) and we typically go about 4 1/2 hours.

 

[upNdown]

Was this a group of guys used to playing with each other and eager to play like maniacs, just to screw each other? My guys sometimes play like that, though it’s isually low stakes cash games. That’s the only explanation I can think of for that kind of play (other than everybody being noobs/morons.) not sure how a format change could affect either situation.

 

[upNdown]

50 B.B. starting stacks will not ever get you a 4-5 hour tournament with 8 people.

Good point. Somehow I skimmed over that.
Unless I’m playing limit, I have no interest in a 50bb tournament.

 

[BGinGA]

50 B.B. starting stacks will not ever get you a 4-5 hour tournament with 8 people.

Without actually seeing the format used, ^^this^^ would be my first reaction also.

50bb starting stacks -- unless using really slow blind increases or overly-long blind level times, or coupled with massive amounts of re-buys -- lends itself to turbo-style event right out of the gate. Would not surprise me whatsoever to see it finish in under two hours.

I'd be glad to help you come up with a format that would routinely finish in 4 hours or so for eight players, while providing at least 2-3 hours play for the majority before busting out.

 

[Quad Johnson]

50 B.B. starting stacks will not ever get you a 4-5 hour tournament with 8 people. With those numbers you’re looking at 2 hours max. My single table tournaments start with 400 big blinds and have a standard structure based on the WSOP with a couple of the flatter levels removed (250-500, 1200-2400) and we typically go about 4 1/2 hours.

Would you mind posting your blind structure?

I wouldn't mind doing a single table format like this.

TIA!

 

[Chris Manzoni]

Works great with 10, no doubling of blinds except for 1st two levels, we start at 8 and typically are done by 1230 or so

20k chips,

x8/25
x8/100
x6/500
x6/1000
x2/5000

20 min levels, no antes

Single re entry if felted before break or stack surrender at the break

25/50
50/100
75/150
100/200
150/300

Break- round up 25s

200-400
300-600
500-1000
800-1600

Break- round up 100s & most 500s

1000-2000
1500-3000
2000-4000
3000-6000
5000-10000
8000-16000- usually where it ends

Short break- round up 1ks & any remaining 500s (if players are nitty lol, rarely goes this far)

10000-20000
15000-30000
20000-40000

 

[Quad Johnson]

Thanks @Chris Manzoni ! I think I'll tweak it just a wee bit. My tourney set can support 40k stacks for a single table, so I think I'll start at 50/100 and just go from there so as not to have any double jumps.

Thanks again!

 

[BGinGA]

Works great with 10, no doubling of blinds except for 1st two levels, we start at 8 and typically are done by 1230 or so

20k chips,

x8/25
x8/100
x6/500
x6/1000
x2/5000

20 min levels, no antes

Single re entry if felted before break or stack surrender at the break

25/50
50/100
75/150
100/200
150/300

Break- round up 25s

200-400
300-600
500-1000
800-1600

Break- round up 100s & most 500s

1000-2000
1500-3000
2000-4000
3000-6000
5000-10000
8000-16000- usually where it ends

Short break- round up 1ks & any remaining 500s (if players are nitty lol, rarely goes this far)

10000-20000
15000-30000
20000-40000

No reason to have the huge jumps between 300/600-500/1000 and 3000/6000-5000/10000 levels, either. Just replace the 500/1000 and 5000/10000 levels with 400/800 & 600/1200 (and 4000/8000 & 6000/12000). Makes all of the level progressions relatively equal, with none greater than 50%

Adding a 25/75 level at L2 fixes the first 100% jump (as does just starting at 50/100 with 40k stacks).

 

[Quad Johnson]

No reason to have the huge jumps between 300/600-500/1000 and 3000/6000-5000/10000 levels, either. Just replace the 500/1000 and 5000/10000 levels with 400/800 & 600/1200 (and 4000/8000 & 6000/12000). Makes all of the level progressions relatively equal, with none greater than 50%

Adding a 25/75 level at L2 fixes the first 100% jump (as does just starting at 50/100 with 40k stacks).

I think he has those so as to be done with the 100 chips on the table during that stage of the tourney.

 

[BGinGA]

I think he has those so as to be done with the 100 chips on the table during that stage of the tourney.

Not so. Either way, the following level is 800/1600 (or 8000/16000). Does not change the planned color-ups.

 

[Chris Manzoni]

If you want 4-5 hours this is what works. If you want longer by all means flatten the structure.

 

[BGinGA]

Flattening the structure doesn't add any significant time to the event.... .it just avoids the unnecessarily-high 67% and 60% increases (followed by a 25% jump in each case). I'd rather have more consistency across the entire structure than a bunch of random big jumps for no reason.

 

[Ellasdaddy]

I used the usual blind calculator because it seemed a very straightforward scenario. I used 50bb because usually people complain that the games run too slow (7hrs+) but that’s because of their play (everybody limps, nobody hits a flop, everyone checks, everyone folds to river min bet). I can count on one hand how many preflop raises or 3 bets I’ve ever witnessed anyone but me make.

Starting stack 500K (everyone likes more chips but 1 large chip also)

20 x 5K
12 x 25K
1 x 100K

My real issue wasn’t ending in under 2 hours, though.

1. [+0:00] -- 5000 / 10000

2. [+0:20] -- 10000 / 20000

3. [+0:40] -- 15000 / 30000

4. [+1:00] -- 20000 / 40000

5. [+1:20] -- 20000 / 40000 (ante = 5000)

6. [+1:40] -- 25000 / 50000 (ante = 5000)

7. [+2:00] -- 30000 / 60000 (ante = 10000)

8. [+2:20] -- 35000 / 70000 (ante = 10000)

9. [+2:40] -- 45000 / 90000 (ante = 10000)

10. [+3:00] -- 55000 / 110000 (ante = 10000)

11. [+3:20] -- 65000 / 130000 (ante = 20000)

12. [+3:40] -- 75000 / 150000 (ante = 20000)

13. [+4:00] -- 85000 / 170000 (ante = 20000)

14. [+4:20] -- 95000 / 190000 (ante = 20000)

15. [+4:40] -- 100000 / 200000 (ante = 30000)

16. [+5:00] -- 150000 / 300000 (ante = 40000)

17. [+5:20] -- 200000 / 400000 (ante = 50000)

18. [+5:40] -- 250000 / 500000 (ante = 50000)

19. [+6:00] -- 350000 / 700000 (ante = 100000)

 

[Ellasdaddy]

Was this a group of guys used to playing with each other and eager to play like maniacs, just to screw each other? My guys sometimes play like that, though it’s isually low stakes cash games. That’s the only explanation I can think of for that kind of play (other than everybody being noobs/morons.) not sure how a format change could affect either situation.

Absolutely not. The total opposite really. The second game swung right back to the norm on this structure. That’s why I felt it wasn’t a structure issue but in my unpreparedness for such an occurence and honestly in the quality of this group of poker playing friends.

 

[Gobbs]

With a total of 4 million in play, there are only 100 BBs on the table when you start level 4. That's way too low to be conducive to good poker.

 

[BGinGA]

Not mention that ~everybody~ has just 25bb after the first 20 minutes of play. With proper play, the field should thin out to four players tops (of eight) after just 3-4 levels. And even then, they're all relatively short-stacked. How this structure ever gets past L9 is beyond me.

 

[trigs]

I wanted to play cash in the first place, but every soul I know feels a stigma about playing cash.

What's this about? Why the stigma about playing cash games?

 

[Psypher1000]

Why the stigma about playing cash games?

Because in a NL situation you're taking friends' real money, and at some games that could be a mortgage payment. Many people don't like the idea of (or simply don't understand) limit games, and if you move down to microstakes they either feel like it's lesser poker or simply choose to play stupidly just because they can afford to reload numerous times.

 

[Ellasdaddy]

What's this about? Why the stigma about playing cash games?

Something I’ve dealt with for years with friends and family. From what I’ve gathered in conversation, some just think tourneys are a better value for them. Some can’t afford to play anything for $50-100 a pop, yet they complain that 5/10c or 25/50c is too small and try to play it like turbo LAGs. Some think tourneys are the only way to play. Some want their night to play like what they see on ESPN. Some can’t wrap their minds around plunking down cash and getting chips of the same value in return, as if cash chips leave their stack faster or it costs more in the end. Most have never played $1/2 at a casino or room but have a grasp of basic play and decorum. Some of it is that the same 2 or 3 people basically win everything anyway. I’ve tanked hands purposely to keep people interested and coming.

I’ve posted in the past about being frustrated over all this. I end up very rarely driving to Parx an hour away during a weekday to scratch my itches. My free time is nearly nil and being able to host a fun, regular, slightly more serious group would be amazing. It all kinda sucks.

 

[Ellasdaddy]

Because in a NL situation you're taking friends' real money, and at some games that could be a mortgage payment. Many people don't like the idea of (or simply don't understand) limit games, and if you move down to microstakes they either feel like it's lesser poker or simply choose to play stupidly just because they can afford to reload numerous times.

Yeah, this too.

 

[trigs]

Because in a NL situation you're taking friends' real money, and at some games that could be a mortgage payment. Many people don't like the idea of (or simply don't understand) limit games, and if you move down to microstakes they either feel like it's lesser poker or simply choose to play stupidly just because they can afford to reload numerous times.

My gf just said something like this to me yesterday when I got home from the casino. I cashed out $350 in profit in a $1-$3 game and she was like "How can you just take strangers' money? It must feel so weird." I said it doesn't feel weird at all. Poker is a battle of wits and I love competitions like that. I used to play a lot of chess in the past too. I find games where there's a mental battle against other people so fun. I get that it's for real money, and I know that sometimes the money people are putting on the table can be a significant amount for them, but that's their choice. We're all adults here and are responsible for our own decisions. No one is forcing them to gamble in this game so I find it difficult to feel bad about taking their money.

 

[Psypher1000]

I find it difficult to feel bad about taking their money.

Agreed, and I suspect most folks on PCF - and poker afficionados in general - would feel the same way. Many home game players I've encountered, though, feel like the monetary aspect takes the enjoyment out of the game for them for whatever reason (many of which Ellasdaddy outlined above), and some just think playing for pure cash isn't something you do with friends. It becomes "unfriendly" for them.

 

[trigs]

Agreed, and I suspect most folks on PCF - and poker afficionados in general - would feel the same way. Many home game players I've encountered, though, feel like the monetary aspect takes the enjoyment out of the game for them for whatever reason (many of which Ellasdaddy outlined above), and some just think playing for pure cash isn't something you do with friends. It becomes "unfriendly" for them.

Then honestly maybe they shouldn't be playing poker. Play Crazy 8s or Hearts or something. After all, poker is not card game, it's a betting game that's played with cards.

 

[BGinGA]

Something I’ve dealt with for years with friends and family. From what I’ve gathered in conversation, some just think tourneys are a better value for them. Some can’t afford to play anything for $50-100 a pop, yet they complain that 5/10c or 25/50c is too small and try to play it like turbo LAGs. Some think tourneys are the only way to play. Some want their night to play like what they see on ESPN. Some can’t wrap their minds around plunking down cash and getting chips of the same value in return, as if cash chips leave their stack faster or it costs more in the end.

Best way to deal with this imo is to structure your tournament where they are playing for real money. For example:

If your tourney buy-in is $20, make the starting stacks = T20, and use 20c/40c opening blinds, if wanting to keep it at 50bb starting stacks (although I'd recommend 10c/20c for 100bb, or even 5c/10c for a relative big stack of 200bb).

Nothing like seeing their 3-bet with Q7o in terms of real dollars (or cents) relative to their starting $20 to bring home the point of proper hand selection, and that every.single.chip is important in the big picture view -- regardless if cash play or tournament play.

I think doing this every so often actually improves the play of the casual player.... and that can only be good for the long term health of your game.

 

[Psypher1000]

Best way to deal with this imo is to structure your tournament where they are playing for real money

I'll have to try this sometime...thanks for the idea!

 

[Ellasdaddy]

Best way to deal with this imo is to structure your tournament where they are playing for real money. For example:

If your tourney buy-in is $20, make the starting stacks = T20, and use 20c/40c opening blinds, if wanting to keep it at 50bb starting stacks (although I'd recommend 10c/20c for 100bb, or even 5c/10c for a relative big stack of 200bb).

Nothing like seeing their 3-bet with Q7o in terms of real dollars (or cents) relative to their starting $20 to bring home the point of proper hand selection, and that every.single.chip is important in the big picture view -- regardless if cash play or tournament play.

I think doing this every so often actually improves the play of the casual player.... and that can only be good for the long term health of your game.

Man, I really like this. A lot.

 

[JustinInMN]

With your structure as posted, you reach the point where the blinds and antes are 5 percent of the chips at 5 at around level 8-9 (depending on antes). So ending on level four is very early, but you aren't structured to go 4-5 hours either, so tweaking the structure as suggested is part of the answer.

It's weird to hear this stigma about cash though. Cash games are far more common in my circle.

You don't have to play for mortgage money either. My family won't go much higher than .05-.10 with a 10 buy in. Seldom does anyone go more than 3 buys deep.

 

[Ellasdaddy]

It's weird to hear this stigma about cash though. Cash games are far more common in my circle.

You don't have to play for mortgage money either. My family won't go much higher than .05-.10 with a 10 buy in. Seldom does anyone go more than 3 buys deep.

Something I’ve dealt with for years with friends and family. From what I’ve gathered in conversation, some just think tourneys are a better value for them. Some can’t afford to play anything for $50-100 a pop, yet they complain that 5/10c or 25/50c is too small and try to play it like turbo LAGs.

I’ve tried. I got asked an hour in to that 5/10c game to raise the blinds and break out bigger chips. I suggested allowing straddles and the group thought I wanted to have an orgy... So a tourney must be played first, and if a cash game goes off, blinds are good at as little as 25/50c but nobody’s buying in for more than $20 a pop.

I just wanna cover myself for odd scenarios like this past weekend in the future and set some framework to play cash more. Not likely though.

 

[upNdown]

I suggested allowing straddles and the group thought I wanted to have an orgy...

That’s the best thing I’ve read in a while