Tourney Hosting first 2-table tournament - advice please! (1 Viewer)

Here the guy who created the thread wanted T20.000, 2 tables with a duration of 5 hours max.

I don't see a correct structure where it worths to use a T25 chip... Except reducing the starting stack as I suggested to 5000.
I just showed you a structure with T25 and 25K starting stacks that will complete in about 5 hours. Tell me what is wrong with it or why it won't work. Give me sound arguments, not just your opinion.
 
I’ve hosted a two-table tournament for years now… Some ideas to consider:

1) A on-time bonus works wonders. Without some inducement to show up for a 7 pm start, it may be until 7:30 or even 8 before you kick things off.

The bonus should be hefty enough to matter, say 20% of the starting stack (the base of which you may want to reduce down somewhat).

2) Breaks I find are best after 5 or 6 levels, depending on which makes the most sense for coloring up, which may depend on what base chip you use… Or how many smokers you have in the group. ;-)

2) I’ve held tourneys which start at either 25/50 or 100/200, with starting stacks of 10K and $20K respectively, plus a 2k or 5K bonus for those arriving on time. So 12K / 25K.

We allow unlimited rebuys until the break, plus an optional add-on of about 10BB during the break to extend playing time for short stacks and get some more money in the hopper.

I would not use the add-on in a more commercial or professional setting, but for a friendly home game it helps keep players happy by ensuring they get a decent amount of hands in even on bad nights.

Though this puts a fairly large number of chips into play, usually half the players are out in 2.5-3 hours, and the game is usually done in about 4 hours, especially if the leaders agree to is a chop.

On very rare occasions the tourney has lasted 5-6 hours, if no deal is struck and stacks stay relatively even, but that has happened only a few times over many years. Usually the top players either want to get home by midnight or join the cash game which starts once enough people bust.

I find the length of the game is pretty much the same with either structure, though they are not identical in terms of ratios of starting stacks to blinds. That may have as much to do with player temperaments as anything else—after a couple hours some guys just get impatient/reckless.

P.S. Our blind structures for each type of game are pretty standard; just search PCF for typical progressions.
 
P.P.S. The one thing I can’t stand in tourneys of 2-4 tables is a bad blind structure.

For example, I stopped playing in one firehouse tourney which was very soft, but had a ridiculous structure.

The blinds started very low, with a zillion big blinds and long levels, using a lot of non-standard values (75/150 > 100/200 > 125/250 > 150/300 > 200/300 > 200/400 > 250/500 etc.). The first 3 hours progressed at an absolute snail’s pace, made even worse by players taking forever to act. It generally took 6-7 hours to get down to one table… But then blinds started jumping up rapidly and exponentially, so it became almost chance who survived the last hour. It took too long and reduced skill edges.

I kind of think that was their goal—give the mostly older crowd an all-day event where anyone could win.
 
I’ve hosted a two-table tournament for years now… Some ideas to consider:

1) A on-time bonus works wonders. Without some inducement to show up for a 7 pm start, it may be until 7:30 or even 8 before you kick things off.

The bonus should be hefty enough to matter, say 20% of the starting stack (the base of which you may want to reduce down somewhat).

2) Breaks I find are best after 5 or 6 levels, depending on which makes the most sense for coloring up, which may depend on what base chip you use… Or how many smokers you have in the group. ;-)

2) I’ve held tourneys which start at either 25/50 or 100/200, with starting stacks of 10K and $20K respectively, plus a 2k or 5K bonus for those arriving on time. So 12K / 25K.

We allow unlimited rebuys until the break, plus an optional add-on of about 10BB during the break to extend playing time for short stacks and get some more money in the hopper.

I would not use the add-on in a more commercial or professional setting, but for a friendly home game it helps keep players happy by ensuring they get a decent amount of hands in even on bad nights.

Though this puts a fairly large number of chips into play, usually half the players are out in 2.5-3 hours, and the game is usually done in about 4 hours, especially if the leaders agree to is a chop.

On very rare occasions the tourney has lasted 5-6 hours, if no deal is struck and stacks stay relatively even, but that has happened only a few times over many years. Usually the top players either want to get home by midnight or join the cash game which starts once enough people bust.

I find the length of the game is pretty much the same with either structure, though they are not identical in terms of ratios of starting stacks to blinds. That may have as much to do with player temperaments as anything else—after a couple hours some guys just get impatient/reckless.

P.S. Our blind structures for each type of game are pretty standard; just search PCF for typical progressions.
Lots of great ideas. Thanks!

I have an on-time bonus in my game, but it's pretty small. This game I'm planning is mostly a family game and we are all staying at the same hotel, so I don't expect a lot of late comers. For future home games I will definitely consider raising the bonus and lowering starting stacks. I may tweak this one a bit too.

Do you have any specific comments about the structure I posted? I tried real hard to make them as smooth and sensible as possible. After the first one from 50 to 100, they are all between 25% and 50%, with most between 30% and 43%.

Everything I have read here says that tournaments will typically end when the big blind approaches 5% of total chips in play. So that is what I use to estimate the length of the tournament.
 
I just showed you a structure with T25 and 25K starting stacks that will complete in about 5 hours. Tell me what is wrong with it or why it won't work. Give me sound arguments, not just your opinion.

Things that I don't like :

1. 100% jump from 25-50 to 50-100. After 12' of play, the stack deepness is reduced by half. It's in fact even efficient than an on time arrival bonus to get everyone there on time ahah.
2. 12' is very very short. I hope you'll use 2 rotating decks per table if it's a self deal game.
3. I'd use 600-1200 and 800-1600 over 500-1000 and 700-1400 but it's just personal pref. Min 5 chips is needed to make the 1400 Big Blind...
4. I'm not a fan of 2000-4000 to 2500-5000 jump. 2000-4000 to 3000-6000 is much consistent with the rest of the structure.
5. SB 9000... Again, 5 chips to make the small blind and even 6 to make the BB.

For the rest, the blinds progression looks smooth. Just that - to me - it uses odd levels.
 
Last edited:
@jrs146 Still hoping to hear your commentary on how your tournament went. Did you stick with T25 base and 20K starting stacks?
 
I’ve hosted a two-table tournament for years now… Some ideas to consider:

1) A on-time bonus works wonders. Without some inducement to show up for a 7 pm start, it may be until 7:30 or even 8 before you kick things off.

The bonus should be hefty enough to matter, say 20% of the starting stack (the base of which you may want to reduce down somewhat).

2) Breaks I find are best after 5 or 6 levels, depending on which makes the most sense for coloring up, which may depend on what base chip you use… Or how many smokers you have in the group. ;-)

2) I’ve held tourneys which start at either 25/50 or 100/200, with starting stacks of 10K and $20K respectively, plus a 2k or 5K bonus for those arriving on time. So 12K / 25K.

We allow unlimited rebuys until the break, plus an optional add-on of about 10BB during the break to extend playing time for short stacks and get some more money in the hopper.

I would not use the add-on in a more commercial or professional setting, but for a friendly home game it helps keep players happy by ensuring they get a decent amount of hands in even on bad nights.

Though this puts a fairly large number of chips into play, usually half the players are out in 2.5-3 hours, and the game is usually done in about 4 hours, especially if the leaders agree to is a chop.

On very rare occasions the tourney has lasted 5-6 hours, if no deal is struck and stacks stay relatively even, but that has happened only a few times over many years. Usually the top players either want to get home by midnight or join the cash game which starts once enough people bust.

I find the length of the game is pretty much the same with either structure, though they are not identical in terms of ratios of starting stacks to blinds. That may have as much to do with player temperaments as anything else—after a couple hours some guys just get impatient/reckless.

P.S. Our blind structures for each type of game are pretty standard; just search PCF for typical progressions.
I am going to try something similar on Saturday with my group of friends. What structure would you recommend for a deep stack event (25k, blinds at 25/50, 19 players)? I would like to keep it around 4.5-5 hours.
 
I am going to try something similar on Saturday with my group of friends. What structure would you recommend for a deep stack event (25k, blinds at 25/50, 19 players)? I would like to keep it around 4.5-5 hours.
Your game sounds pretty similar to both mine and OPs. There are several suggestions for that on the first page of the thread.
 
I am going to try something similar on Saturday with my group of friends. What structure would you recommend for a deep stack event (25k, blinds at 25/50, 19 players)? I would like to keep it around 4.5-5 hours.

2 tables, 500BB and a game finishing in less than 5 hours would be a deepstsck illusion.

You'll have to make concessions. Very short levels, agressive structure, ... or better : smaller stacks but a progressive structure with decent levels lengths.
 
. I understand the concept of having the levels long enough to get in a full orbit, but is there really any major downside to not getting in full orbits each level?
Only if your ok with the first three people paying 25/50 to see their hands, and then the next three pay 50/100 to see their hands and the next three to pay 100/200 to see their hands. Hell just make it seat dependent then, forget time.
 
I am going to try something similar on Saturday with my group of friends. What structure would you recommend for a deep stack event (25k, blinds at 25/50, 19 players)? I would like to keep it around 4.5-5 hours.

25K starting stacks is too much for a 25/50 game if you want to finish in 5 hours or less. Unless your blinds are really short.

I’d suggest more like 10-12K to start, 20 minute blinds for a T25. (Not sure if you are allowing rebuys / addons.(
 
25K starting stacks is too much for a 25/50 game if you want to finish in 5 hours or less. Unless your blinds are really short.

I’d suggest more like 10-12K to start, 20 minute blinds for a T25. (Not sure if you are allowing rebuys / addons.(
Trust me, I’ve tried reasoning with them with no success. They prefer it that way. On top of rebuys (which makes no sense unless someone is a complete maniac) and add-ons.
 
Trust me, I’ve tried reasoning with them with no success. They prefer it that way. On top of rebuys (which makes no sense unless someone is a complete maniac) and add-ons.
I have reasons why I want to do T25 base and 20/25K starting stacks. To make that fit into the allotted time, I will do 12 minute levels. Others say - NO, you can't do that. You'll only get 3 hands in per level. If that's true, and I'm "supposed" to get in a full orbit every level, then I'd have to have 40-45 minute levels to ensure that happens on a full table. But I'm hearing recommendations to do 20 minutes. Even that is not getting in a full orbit. So what's the difference if I get in 3 hands or 5-6 hands per level if I'm still not getting in a full orbit???
 
But I'm hearing recommendations to do 20 minutes. Even that is not getting in a full orbit. So what's the difference if I get in 3 hands or 5-6 hands per level if I'm still not getting in a full orbit???
20 minutes should be sufficient for a full orbit if you are averaging 2 min per hand at 10-handed. At 9-handed you can average about 2m13s per hand and still be good on 20 min levels. I think 2 minutes is a good rule of thumb for an average. Some hands will get to the river and go longer, some hands will be raise it-take it and be over in 30 seconds.

I'd have to have 40-45 minute levels to ensure that happens on a full table.
I hope your average hand time is not 4-5 minutes long.
 
Again the main tournament "levers" to influence length are
1) Starting Stack
2) Blind progression (both the first level and the rate of increase)
3) Level Time

I am a strong proponent that Level Time should always be at least 2 min per player at a full table to give a chance for a button to make an orbit during play. In other words, that lever has a strict limit. Other posters have rules of thumb on how low starting stacks should go and how fast is too fast with a blind progression.

I mean yes, technically random is random and from that standpoint there's nothing "unfair" if everyone doesn't have the button for the same number of hands in each orbit. But it is a bad perception for players to only see the button go halfway around per level, they will perceive the structure is too fast.
 
@Kid_Eastwood Appreciate the input, but I know how to create the levels. I have spreadsheets up the waa-hoo that I've been tinkering with for over a year. My interest and questions here are more regarding the "why" than the "how." I want to discuss pros and cons and understand the thought process, not just be told what to do. I know that T100 is what is popular now, but I want to start with T25. I also want to eventually get my higher denom chips into play, so I want to have deeper stacks. I understand the concept of having the levels long enough to get in a full orbit, but is there really any major downside to not getting in full orbits each level? Also, with my shorter levels, I will probably push rebuy cutoff out to around level 8 or 9. Still in the same 30ish big blinds area where yours is.

This is my current 20 person structure that I am considering. Feel free to pick it apart and tell me WHY it's not going to make for a good tournament. Convince me to change it with reason and logic. Thanks!

View attachment 806627

I like to do levels that are based on multiplying 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12, and 8-16 of each chip in play. There are variants of this you can do to slow play down more, but it looks like 5 hours is the goal.

So assuming we are going to do at least 20 minute levels in a 5 hour window, that means we are targeting 15 levels.

50-100, 75-150, 100-200, 150-300 (remove T25)
200-400, 300-600, 400-800, 600-1200, 800-1600 (remove T100)
1000-2000, 1500-3000, 2K-4K, 3K-6K, 4K-8K, 6K-12K**, 8K-16K (remove T500 and T1000)
10K-20K, 15K-30K***, 20K-40K

**15 levels (5 hours, plus breaks)
***18 levels (6 hours, plus breaks)

Then we can use the 20BB rule to multiple the BB for that level by 20, and we get 240K. That's the target for chips in play. It looks like you are expected 35 buy ins so 240K/35 is a shade under 7K.

If you are open to playing 3 more levels for a 6 hour window, then we land of 15K-30K for the last expected level. 30K*20 is 600K in play. Divided by 35 entries give you a starting stack around 17K.

The other approach is if you know your starting stack then you figure out which level you need to land on in the alloted time. So as you did in your spreadsheet you plan about T900K in play using T25K starting stacks, or the big blind to hit about 45K, for simplicity, let's say that will be the 20K-40K level.

So you could do that in 6 hours using my above blind structure starting on 75-150, or 5 hours by starting on 200-400 (which is probably in part the reason @Kid_Eastwood is suggesting skipping T25 chips.)

So I know this got long, but is shows how to use the different "levers" to manipulate the length of the tournament. But seriously, don't do 12 minute levels, much too short for full tables unless you are online :).
 
20 minutes should be sufficient for a full orbit if you are averaging 2 min per hand at 10-handed. At 9-handed you can average about 2m13s per hand and still be good on 20 min levels. I think 2 minutes is a good rule of thumb for an average. Some hands will get to the river and go longer, some hands will be raise it-take it and be over in 30 seconds.


I hope your average hand time is not 4-5 minutes long.
I was basing that on someone else's comment that I could only play 3 hands in 12 minutes. It wasn't based on actual experience. I thought it was off, but hey, I was asking for advice and that is what I was told so I had no reason not to believe it.
 
I like to do levels that are based on multiplying 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12, and 8-16 of each chip in play. There are variants of this you can do to slow play down more, but it looks like 5 hours is the goal.

So assuming we are going to do at least 20 minute levels in a 5 hour window, that means we are targeting 15 levels.

50-100, 75-150, 100-200, 150-300 (remove T25)
200-400, 300-600, 400-800, 600-1200, 800-1600 (remove T100)
1000-2000, 1500-3000, 2K-4K, 3K-6K, 4K-8K, 6K-12K**, 8K-16K (remove T500 and T1000)
10K-20K, 15K-30K***, 20K-40K

**15 levels (5 hours, plus breaks)
***18 levels (6 hours, plus breaks)

Then we can use the 20BB rule to multiple the BB for that level by 20, and we get 240K. That's the target for chips in play. It looks like you are expected 35 buy ins so 240K/35 is a shade under 7K.

If you are open to playing 3 more levels for a 6 hour window, then we land of 15K-30K for the last expected level. 30K*20 is 600K in play. Divided by 35 entries give you a starting stack around 17K.

The other approach is if you know your starting stack then you figure out which level you need to land on in the alloted time. So as you did in your spreadsheet you plan about T900K in play using T25K starting stacks, or the big blind to hit about 45K, for simplicity, let's say that will be the 20K-40K level.

So you could do that in 6 hours using my above blind structure starting on 75-150, or 5 hours by starting on 200-400 (which is probably in part the reason @Kid_Eastwood is suggesting skipping T25 chips.)

So I know this got long, but is shows how to use the different "levers" to manipulate the length of the tournament. But seriously, don't do 12 minute levels, much too short for full tables unless you are online :).
I appreciate all the in depth suggestions. Unfortunately I do not want to exceed 4.5 hours of playing time, not including breaks. This is a family gathering and some will gripe if it runs any longer. So I will tweak things and see if I can't come up with a compromise and a way to lengthen the levels a bit. Maybe I can make 15 minute levels work. That would be 7-8 hands per level and would give me space for 18 levels. If I end up with 24 or less players I'll limit the tables to 8 each. Then it might work. I've already dropped starting stacks down to 20K. Plus an on-time bonus of 3K.
 
I appreciate all the in depth suggestions. Unfortunately I do not want to exceed 4.5 hours of playing time, not including breaks. This is a family gathering and some will gripe if it runs any longer.

Another thing you could do is set a hard end time. Say you start at 1:30 pm. If there is no winner by 6 pm, let them know at the start that an ICM chop will be enforced.

I would not normally recommend it, but for a family gathering such as you describe, seems OK. If some aren’t down with a chop, they can always play more aggressively/ looser as the deadline approaches.

This could lead to some gamesmanship (or deliberate slow play) toward the end, but it solves the time concern. Anyway, sounds like this will be less about money than bragging rights—no?
 
Thank you. I thought 3 hands in 12 minutes sounded off, but I never actually kept track before.

I was basing that on someone else's comment that I could only play 3 hands in 12 minutes. It wasn't based on actual experience. I thought it was off, but hey, I was asking for advice and that is what I was told so I had no reason not to believe it.

If you use a single deck only and if players are not use to deal, 4' per hand is not that crazy.
 
So you could do that in 6 hours using my above blind structure starting on 75-150, or 5 hours by starting on 200-400 (which is probably in part the reason @Kid_Eastwood is suggesting skipping T25 chips.)

This is exactly the reason in fact. To start the tourney with higher levels (that do no require T25) to shorten the tourney duration.
 
Last edited:
I was basing that on someone else's comment that I could only play 3 hands in 12 minutes. It wasn't based on actual experience. I thought it was off, but hey, I was asking for advice and that is what I was told so I had no reason not to believe it.
If you are playing with experienced players then yeah, you can get in more. But I thought you had mainly inexperienced players that maybe didn’t even understand the basics, just going by your description. But it sounds like you have seasoned pros now so that a different story.
With unexperienced players you might be lucky to get two hands per 12 minute level, if alcohol or ego are involved. They’ve seen that you are supposed to tank on every decision on tv. Half the time a minute wil pass before they realize the action is on them. But whatever, do your thing and hope it goes well.
 
Again the main tournament "levers" to influence length are
1) Starting Stack
2) Blind progression (both the first level and the rate of increase)
3) Level Time

I am a strong proponent that Level Time should always be at least 2 min per player at a full table to give a chance for a button to make an orbit during play. In other words, that lever has a strict limit. Other posters have rules of thumb on how low starting stacks should go and how fast is too fast with a blind progression.

I mean yes, technically random is random and from that standpoint there's nothing "unfair" if everyone doesn't have the button for the same number of hands in each orbit. But it is a bad perception for players to only see the button go halfway around per level, they will perceive the structure is too fast.
The level time is the "easiest" to adjust though.

Starting stack is hard to adjust - say you are put out all the chips, then some jackass doesn't show up. Now you'd have to take his stack off the table, and remove/change some chips for each player's stack. Annoying.

Blind progression is the second easiest to adjust, but a distant second. As you don't want to start willy-nilly whacking out levels and have weird large jumps. Also it may mess with players who are used to a certain blind structure.

Level time is the easiest to adjust. You can duplicate your well-vetted "known-good" blind structure and just tweak up/down the level time depending on how many players you manage to pull together.

But I see your point in wanting an orbit+ per level. It does seem ideal. I wish players understood what kind of havok they create when they ghost after saying they'd attend or late cancel.
 
Level time is the easiest to adjust. You can duplicate your well-vetted "known-good" blind structure and just tweak up/down the level time depending on how many players you manage to pull together.

But I see your point in wanting an orbit+ per level. It does seem ideal. I wish players understood what kind of havok they create when they ghost after saying they'd attend or late cancel.

Exactly. Level time may be the easiest to adjust, but there really is a minimum past which this lever should not be pushed, and I am settled that 2 minutes per player for a given table is the lowest it should go. I would rather put up with 50-60% level jumps than go lower than 18 minutes per round in a 9 max tournament.

But good insight on how impacting stack size then influences set design.
 

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.

Back
Top Bottom