Deep field payout tournaments - the weaker players will make the money, at least occasionally. [...] Shallow field payouts - It's entirely possible some fish will never get paid.”
I’ve been keeping rough stats about attendance and cashes for about nine months now for my game. It’s a two table tournament, usually 14-18 players, 4-5 places get paid depending on how many attend, with 4th and 5th only getting their original buy-in back. The sample size is small—18 games over 9 months—but for what it’s worth, here are some numbers:
* 25 players have attended 4 times or more. I have omitted stats for those who have played only 1-3 times during this period.
* The average number of times attended for this group is 11. The median number of appearances is 12.5. So of this roster, most are attending about 60-65% of the time.
* Among these 25 players, there are 75 total cashes (1st-5th places finishes) among 277 total appearances. So 27% of the overall field is getting at least their buy-in back.
* Players making the money are distributed as follows:
3 — 0 cashes
5 — 1 cash
7 — 2 cashes
2 — 3 cashes
4 — 4 cashes
1 — 5 cashes
1 — 6 cashes
2 — 7 cashes
1 — 8 cashes
* 49 of 75 cashes for this group are distributed among 9 players. That is, 65% of cashes are made by 36% of the players.
* 33 of 75 cashes are distributed among 5 players. That is, 44% of cashes are made by 20% of the players.
* However, all of these stats are skewed somewhat by the fact that the top performers all have 12 or more appearances, whereas some of the lower performers have 5-10 appearances.
* The “best” two performances are 8 cashes in 14 tries and 7 cashes in 12 tries. (FWIW, I have 7 cashes in 18 tries.)
* The “worst” players include 0 cashes in 7 tries, 2 cashes in 18 tries, and 2 cashes in 17 tries. The latter two are, mysteriously, my most regular attendees. They not only show up 95-100% of the time, they also are usually the first two to show up on any given night.
The main things which jumps out to me here are that (a) most of the money is being won by a small group of regs; yet (b) this does not seem to be deterring people from attending.
I tend to find that if, say, there are 16 players and we pay 5 places, three out of five of those cashing will be the “better” players, one will be a middling player, and one will be one of the weaker players who happens to run great in that session. In the last two games, the winner both times was a “bad” player who was just catching the effective nuts over and over again in big hands, while places 2-5 were solid players.
I think the main reasons why “bad” players keep coming back are that the top payout (usually $650-$700) is non-trivial money for most of them, so it presents an enticing prize which they still hope to win eventually; that we expanded the payouts to 5 players (whenever there are 15 or more present); and that the game has a positive social vibe.
Clearly, people want to get out of the house and shoot the shit with friends, and that is worth the price of admission to most. But I have consciously adjusted the tournament structure and payouts to try to make it so that playing is a wash for a “just OK” average player.
If the typical player spent $1,250 over this nine-month period ($100 x 12 appearances) and cashed ~3 times (let's say 1st once, 3rd once, and 5th once), they would be showing either a small loss or gain of maybe $100-$200. I doubt most of the players are doing these kinds of calculations about how they do in the game overall. But most players sort of know instinctively whether they are an overall winner or loser in a home game...
Again, these sample sizes (18 games) are probably not large enough to be very meaningful, and the analysis is kind of shallow. I just note that of this pool of 25, only one (who has no cashes in his last five tries) has effectively dropped out. He says he wants to stay on the lists and is coming back, but I suspect he will not show more than a couple times in the next year, unless he happens to get in the money on his text try... I keep him on because he was a regular for most of this history of this game, which goes back almost a decade across. There are also a couple who have been absent recently due to work/family issues which should clear up in a few months.
Sidenote:
There is a $10 optional high hand and optional $10 bounty chip. About 80% of the players opt for both and 90% opt for one or the other. The first option should a wash for most players over time—you will probably win the high hand almost often enough to pay for the times you don’t... though the players who go deep in the tournament see more hands, and thus in theory have a better shot at making a high one.
The second option is probably a loss for most players, in that most of the bounty chip money goes to the top finishers, who usually are the same people who knocked others out. (Once in a while, someone will miss the money despite having amassed 5-6 bounty chips.)
The occasional windfall of a high hand of $130-$150, plus someone going out before the money getting 10 or 20 bucks back in bounties helps the overall health of the “ecosystem.” Getting even a little money back makes losing feel a little less crappy.
Sorry for the long post, but maybe a couple of people will find this of interest.
