Hey guys. I play in a league monthly 3 table MTT. It starts at 7:30 and usually ends around 1-1:30. The structure is 20 minute blinds. There are 2 small 10 minute breaks. I think the structure sucks. It seems when we get to the final table everyone has 5-15 BB max and there are a few flips to get to the money. Places 1-5 pay. Is this normal? I am wondering if blinds should be going up quicker at the start and slower at the end? I want to propose something for next year, but the league has been going for close to 20 years , so I want to have a sound structure. Also, the game utilizes antes which I find really slows the game down.
Tourney Home MTTs , final table (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter joker80
- Start date
Kain8
Flush
dickzapper
Straight
That ante structure looks pretty brutal, yikes! Seems weird that ante opens at 50. But anyway I think if you don't want to make major changes to the structure you could just bump up to T7000 to start and call it a quick fix. More chips too.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
The structure is fine - it's the players that are broken. If you have multiple players sitting around with 5 BB, then nobody is using their stack to make the important plays vs small stacks. No matter how you change it, nits will nit, but it doesn't make the game any less fun. Just get a little more aggro with your stack, and take the lion's share of the prize pool or go home empty handed.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
It is odd that the antes start at 50 (BB 400) instead of 25 (BB 200), but otherwise it's a pretty normal antie structure, and would not alter the OP's situation.
People nit it up more because 7$ of the buy in goes towards a final table at the end of the year. You get points for how you finish, those points determine who gets seats 1-8 and there is a wild card table for places 9-18 with 2 winners going forward.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
Whatever their reason, they are the reason it goes to a few flips for the money, not the structure. The antes should actually draw out more action, but I understand that they have the tendency to slow things down. I'm about to introduce a new blind structure to my game that uses antes, just to give my players a taste, but it's not something that I would typically recommend.
Do you use 1 deck or 2?
Do you use 1 deck or 2?
They only thing I notice right off the bat is the small starting stack. T10k would double the amount if chips in the tournament which should make the game deeper at the end.... Unless everyone just continues to nit it up.
2 decks, shuffle behind. The antes are always a pain because people forget
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
Yeah, I suspect that will happen in my first run-through as well. My plan is to put one player in charge of ante collection at each table. I have a few Type A personalities that are used to snapping stragglers to attention.
As Zombie noted, the blind structure itself is fine. 100bb to start with an average blinds increase of 44% -- ranging from 20% (L17) to 100% (L2), with most of the early increases at 33-50% and 25-33% in the latter stages. The antes are a bit aggressive, but theoretically they force players to either play or die a slow death (and apparently it's not working for your group). In reality they usually just slow things down, which in your case just makes the slow deaths quicker (fewer hands get played).
I'd keep the structure, but dump the antes. Probably won't change the super-nit play style, but at least stacks won't seem to be as short in the later levels. If you don't notice a significant change after eliminating antes, then consider a more aggressive structure from the middle onward to force more players out earlier, giving the remaining players larger stacks and more room to play. However.....
What is the buy-in? When the final table rake is excessive, it can place greater importance on lasting longer (to score points needed to make the finale) and less emphasis on winning individual events.
The awarded points structure can also dramatically affect this, and usually has more impact than the money involved.
When awarded points are linear, it tends to pay off long-term to just inch up the finishing ladder..... which encourages slow nitty play. When performance is truly rewarded with the points structure, play will typically step-up so that players have a chance to win or place high, rather than just 'beat the other guy' or outlast the shortest stack.
I'd like to see the points structure, as I suspect it is your single biggest problem. Sounds like everybody at the final table is getting points, and there probably isn't much of an increase as they move up in finishing position. Putting some serious points up for grabs for the top finishers (and giving everyone else hardly any) will definitely alter the super-nit approach, since it no longer rewards nitty play by scoring significant points.
I'd keep the structure, but dump the antes. Probably won't change the super-nit play style, but at least stacks won't seem to be as short in the later levels. If you don't notice a significant change after eliminating antes, then consider a more aggressive structure from the middle onward to force more players out earlier, giving the remaining players larger stacks and more room to play. However.....
These two factors ~may~ be part of the problem.
What is the buy-in? When the final table rake is excessive, it can place greater importance on lasting longer (to score points needed to make the finale) and less emphasis on winning individual events.
The awarded points structure can also dramatically affect this, and usually has more impact than the money involved.
When awarded points are linear, it tends to pay off long-term to just inch up the finishing ladder..... which encourages slow nitty play. When performance is truly rewarded with the points structure, play will typically step-up so that players have a chance to win or place high, rather than just 'beat the other guy' or outlast the shortest stack.
I'd like to see the points structure, as I suspect it is your single biggest problem. Sounds like everybody at the final table is getting points, and there probably isn't much of an increase as they move up in finishing position. Putting some serious points up for grabs for the top finishers (and giving everyone else hardly any) will definitely alter the super-nit approach, since it no longer rewards nitty play by scoring significant points.
Frogzilla
4 of a Kind
Try button antes too. The button places a whole table worth of antes in the middle.
Your 20 minute levels and gradual increases feel like a fine structure for home tourney, if folks are tight until they have 5 BB, then the game naturally end in shortstacked shovefest.
Your 20 minute levels and gradual increases feel like a fine structure for home tourney, if folks are tight until they have 5 BB, then the game naturally end in shortstacked shovefest.
This is a really bad idea for tournaments, for several reasons. Since players are eliminated, the amount of the dealer ante changes, making it inconsistent from player to player. It also has the player with optimum position putting in the most money blind, which puts the two players in the small/big blinds at significantly larger disadvantage.
Frogzilla
4 of a Kind
First reason is valid drawback but should be minor. It’s fair and long run should even out. One button ante structure has the button ante equal to big blind which gets around this issue and allows for quicker color-ups.
As to how button ante affects the blinds, I’m not following at all. Button ante should never count towards the players preflop bet, it goes in the middle like a normal ante. If your buttons play wider because of some weird sunk cost fallacy then I guess it alters the play, but that’s just individual misguided choices that have no basis in legitimate strategy.
It is worst when players start dropping out towards the end, but that's not the only problem -- equal posting is also affected as blinds/antes increase. It's just a bad idea for tournaments, since those two things don't happen in cash games (player eliminations and blinds/antes increasing).
Makes no real difference if the button's 'blind bet' is sitting in front of him, or already pushed in the middle. It's still a forced blind bet, and one that is made with positional advantage (unlike regular - and smaller - per-player antes). It actually changes the entire dynamic of the game. To ignore it as a component affecting strategy would be the misguided approach.
Table antes really only work well for stud games where there is no artificial positional advantage, not games with forced blind bets. And they don't work well for tournaments at all, even stud tournaments.
Frogzilla
4 of a Kind
Maybe just agree to disagree on the blinds thing. Button antes DO speed up play and make the “who forgot to ante” thing moot. OP group may prefer the quicker play, or find it weird and ditch it after one tryout.
Button ante is a thing and the right answer for some groups...but not all.
Button ante is a thing and the right answer for some groups...but not all.
Have you ever played in a tournament using blinds with a dealer ante? I have run several. What works in a cash game setting just doesn't work for tournaments, in my experience.
As far as posting dealer antes in a cash game, I don't think many (any?) games that use forced blind bets also use antes.
As far as posting dealer antes in a cash game, I don't think many (any?) games that use forced blind bets also use antes.
Frogzilla
4 of a Kind
Yea, rarely. And it worked well for that group. I don’t even prefer it...I’d much rather everyone pay attention and ante like normal. But in some home games, that’s not how it goes. In those cases, button ante is worth it to avoid having ante police or the nice guys double ante to move the game along. Most home tourneys I participate in just forgo the ante altogether though.
I haven't tried the table ante tournament thing, but was willing to try. This all makes a ton of sense to me. And makes me want to convince my friends to play stud.
Not sure what you are asking.
Most tournaments that use antes have an ante value that is typically about 1/8th of the big blind value for that level (usually ranging between 1/6 and 1/10).
Agreed. @BGinGA convinced me to eliminate ante's in my two table home tourney. It actually sped up the tourney slightly (we played more hands per hour) and it ran significantly smoother. 10/10, would highly recommend.
Frogzilla
4 of a Kind
Here’s an article about it.
https://www.pokernews.com/news/2018/01/big-blind-antes-pros-cons-29848.htm
Both positions are common. Article says aria moved their single antes from button to BB so maybe BB is the new trend.
Poker Zombie
Royal Flush
Aria has always been willing to be a trendsetter in their card room. From multi-table tables (2 games running concurrently on 1 table), to iPad "shot clocks", and now the BB ante. None of these have caught on in any meaningful manner because the ideas contain some sort of flaw.
But who knows? If it does become the norm after the WSOP rolls it out, then I would accept it in the same way I accept bad blind structures - adapt and play.
But who knows? If it does become the norm after the WSOP rolls it out, then I would accept it in the same way I accept bad blind structures - adapt and play.
Somewhere on the East coast started doing it, but they tweaked the procedure on it (which a player is paying "first" if they're forced all in by the two bets), and it started a small twitter foofaraw between Negreanu and Matt Savage the other day. I had thought it was a little more common than just at Aria.
Here's how I see it:
No antes >> player antes >> BB antes >> Button antes.
Consolidated antes in tournaments just introduce too many new problems. And any advantages offered by player antes can be mimicked by a well-designed no-antes blind structure.
The only really good tournament format use for antes is the Antes-Only format. It makes perfect sense there, as every player has the same vested interest in every pot. I run it once a year, and have had several people request it more often. Some of the jokers in our crowd call it "No Uncles."
No antes >> player antes >> BB antes >> Button antes.
Consolidated antes in tournaments just introduce too many new problems. And any advantages offered by player antes can be mimicked by a well-designed no-antes blind structure.
The only really good tournament format use for antes is the Antes-Only format. It makes perfect sense there, as every player has the same vested interest in every pot. I run it once a year, and have had several people request it more often. Some of the jokers in our crowd call it "No Uncles."
Right. I'm talking about which position does the ante in the consolidated formats. I haven't played either format, but if I judge only off who I follow on the twitter machine it seems the BB ante is more preferred and picking up steam compared to the button ante.
Jambine
Full House
I don't like antes in a home game because they slow things down too much. I especially don't like any kind of consolidated ante.
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!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
