Tourney Impact of (big blind) ante in tournament length (1 Viewer)

[Kid_Eastwood]

Hi,

The general rule of thumb is that a NLHE tournament would end +/- at the level where BB = 5% total chips in play given no ante are used.

By experience it's quite accurate.

What would be the effect of the (BB) ante ? Is considering 2.5% instead of 5% would be a good value to get the approximative ending level ?

Kid.

 

[Legend5555]

Hi,

The general rule of thumb is that a NLHE tournament would end +/- at the level where BB = 5% total chips in play given no ante are used.

By experience it's quite accurate.

What would be the effect of the (BB) ante ? Is considering 2.5% instead of 5% would be a good value to get the approximative ending level ?

Kid.

Not sure. Possibly. For sure it would end a bit sooner. Level length has an effect too though. For short level lengths, the difference between the two can be somewhat negligible, especially when players don't adjust to playing with an ante.

 

[Kid_Eastwood]

Not sure. Possibly. For sure it would end a bit sooner. Level length has an effect too though. For short level lengths, the difference between the two can be somewhat negligible, especially when players don't adjust to playing with an ante.

Thinking of 20' levels.

 

[Legend5555]

Thinking of 20' levels.

Then you likely won't notice much of an effect, especially if players don't up their aggression to win those blinds and antes.

 

[Santa123]

@Kid_Eastwood did you host in the meantime single table tourneys with a BBA? Was the effect of the BBA minor?

 

[Kid_Eastwood]

Hi, no, I have not introduced BBA

 

[Santa123]

Hi, no, I have not introduced BBA

Thanks!

 

[JustinInMN]

The theory is that wagering sizes are mostly influenced by the size of the initial pot. Which is why bba is seen as an accerlant.

So if an initial pot with standard Sb+BB is 1.5bb an initial pot with Sb+BB+bba is 2.5 BB which is 2/3 bigger.

So I guess it would follow to make the 20bb also 2/3 bigger when considering bba and settle on 34bb.

The 20bb "rule" is considered an overestimate as it is, so approximating at 35bb or even 40bb probably still okay.

 

[Santa123]

The theory is that wagering sizes are mostly influenced by the size of the initial pot. Which is why bba is seen as an accerlant.

So if an initial pot with standard Sb+BB is 1.5bb an initial pot with Sb+BB+bba is 2.5 BB which is 2/3 bigger.

So I guess it would follow to make the 20bb also 2/3 bigger when considering bba and settle on 34bb.

The 20bb "rule" is considered an overestimate as it is, so approximating at 35bb or even 40bb probably still okay.

Sounds good.

Would be perfect if we can get feedback of members who actually used it in a single table tourney.

 

[Legend5555]

Sounds good.

Would be perfect if we can get feedback of members who actually used it in a single table tourney.

I use BBA in all my home tournaments of 10-20 players. In my experience, the game usually ends around the 40-50bb in play mark. The chips are rarely distributed evenly, so typically one person is on 15bb or less and the game ends in relatively short order.

The more experienced the players are, the faster heads up will go with stacks of 20bb or less as they will know the correct ranges to shove and call with. But if you are dealing with some typical home game players that rarely raise pre, and won't jam stuff like Q7s, JTs, and small pocket pairs, then it could still take a while.

 

[JustinInMN]

Sounds good.

Would be perfect if we can get feedback of members who actually used it in a single table tourney.

Yeah, I haven't put the BBA in play in my tournaments yet, but even the 1-2 table tourneys I host without BBA frequently end on levels with 30-40 BB in play.

 

[DoubleEagle]

I our case, using a BBA hasn't materially changed the length of the tournament.