Tourney Local Tourney - No more T25 in 10k starting stack (1 Viewer)

[DJ_Fett]

I don’t know what to call it, so I did the best I could on the thread title....

I play in Rivers Casino (Pittsburgh) tournaments occasionally. Last night was the first in about a week and the first I saw this, so they just made this change very recently.

10k starting stacks, they used to start the blinds at 25/50. Now, they scrapped the T25 chip and have all three first levels as 100/100. Used to be 25/50, 50/100, 75/150. With the new structure level 4 is back to 100/200 like it was always.

I don’t know if it will be as discussed as BB antes, but I like it. A lot less change making, and I don’t think it made the action any crazier those first couple of levels.

Is this pretty common? And your thoughts on it?

I’ll personally never adopt this, because I love my T25 in my set and am not letting it go!!

 

[DaneWoj]

We’ve moved on to 100/100 as well. Allows us to play longer into the night wo a color up.

plus all other live venues do this as well so we must adapt.

 

[DoubleEagle]

I don’t know what to call it, so I did the best I could on the thread title....

I play in Rivers Casino (Pittsburgh) tournaments occasionally. Last night was the first in about a week and the first I saw this, so they just made this change very recently.

10k starting stacks, they used to start the blinds at 25/50. Now, they scrapped the T25 chip and have all three first levels as 100/100. Used to be 25/50, 50/100, 75/150. With the new structure level 4 is back to 100/200 like it was always.

I don’t know if it will be as discussed as BB antes, but I like it. A lot less change making, and I don’t think it made the action any crazier those first couple of levels.

Is this pretty common? And your thoughts on it?

I’ll personally never adopt this, because I love my T25 in my set and am not letting it go!!

WSOP eliminated T25’s last year in hold’em events when they brought in BB antes. It worked well and eliminated a lot of time lost to making change.

 

[BGinGA]

Only real downsides (besides fewer chips ) is that it's harder to construct bet sizes to meet specific goals (which is a pretty minor consideration), and that it makes for a pretty stagnant tourney beginning when playing with 100BB for three levels before the structure applies any kind of upwards blind pressure.

I'm not a fan, but it could be a lot worse.

 

[DJ_Fett]

I didn’t know it was a thing. Should have realized though, they were pretty late to the BB ante when everyone else was doing it.

 

[JustinInMN]

Yeah, when my local room converted to BBA they quit the green chips too.

 

[Kid_Eastwood]

T10,000 without T25 might be short.

T20,000 would be much better imho if you don't use T25.

100-100
100-200
100-300
200-400
...

T100 X 150
T500 x 50
T1000 x 110
T5000 x 90 (incl. the ones for color-up)

This allows 15/5/11/1 starting stack with one reentry or possibility to play deeper up to 40,000 starting stacks. The color-up is managed with T5000.

An advantage I see in not using a T25 chip is if you want to make a small custom CPC 1-table tournament set with 400 chips and 4 values (100, 500, 1000 and 5000).

And even one single table 20,000 with 3 denominations could work : T100, T500 and T2000. Only 300 chips needed, a rack of each. Although this would far from optimal.

 

[Legend5555]

I don't mind it at all, but typically you would see the starting stacks increased to 15-20k to compensate. My standard tourney starts at 100/100 with 20k stacks. I then repeat 100/100 with a 100 BBA. I like to get the ante started to keep the action up.

 

[BGinGA]

My standard tourney starts at 100/100 with 20k stacks. I then repeat 100/100 with a 100 BBA. I like to get the ante started to keep the action up.

Do you have stats on your structure with/without the BBA (or antes of any kind) that indicate how much additional action it creates?

 

[bsdunbar1]

I can see this catching on and becoming the norm.
You can save a lot of expense by eliminating an additional chip.

 

[Legend5555]

Do you have stats on your structure with/without the BBA (or antes of any kind) that indicate how much additional action it creates?

I'm not having another discussion of BBA with you. It will predictably go nowhere.

 

[BGinGA]

I'm not having another discussion of BBA with you. It will predictably go nowhere.

That's not my question... which was a serious one.

 

[Legend5555]

That's not my question... which was a serious one.

My time is better spent doing just about anything else than tracking whatever we decide to define as "action" during a tournament. Besides, I don't get to play that often and could never come up with enough data to reach any sort of satisfactory conclusion that we would likely ever agree on.

I don't bug you about your choice to generally not use antes. So why do you have to bug me about using BBA? I've made my feelings on the matter (both BBA and antes in general) extremely clear. Further discussion between us on any issue regarding antes of any sort is quite redundant and pointless.

 

[BGinGA]

My time is better spent doing just about anything else than tracking whatever we decide to define as "action" during a tournament. Besides, I don't get to play that often and could never come up with enough data to reach any sort of satisfactory conclusion that we would likely ever agree on.

I don't bug you about your choice to generally not use antes. So why do you have to bug me about using BBA? I've made my feelings on the matter (both BBA and antes in general) extremely clear. Further discussion between us on any issue regarding antes of any sort is quite redundant and pointless.

Christ, I just asked a simple fucking question (to which the answer is apparently 'no'). I was hoping otherwise, so I could compare it to my own reaearch/data.

 

[Legend5555]

Christ, I just asked a simple fucking question (to which the answer is apparently 'no'). I was hoping otherwise, so I could compare it to my own reaearch/data.

That's the difference between us. I don't take this stuff so seriously that I track everything. It's poker. A lot of different things work. There is no best answer IMO. It also why I would never run a league myself. Tracking this kind of stuff isn't fun.

 

[BGinGA]

That's the difference between us. I don't take this stuff so seriously that I track everything. It's poker. A lot of different things work. There is no best answer IMO. It also why I would never run a league myself. Tracking this kind of stuff isn't fun.

It's fine and dandy to have an opinion. But better to be able to back it up with facts, if wanting it to be taken seriously.

 

[Legend5555]

It's fine and dandy to have an opinion. But better to be able to back it up with facts, if wanting it to be taken seriously.

I don't believe it's that hard to intuit that antes should promote action. Just by basic logic, more money in the pot preflop to win should widen general raising ranges from most positions, and should up the BB defending range for to pot odds.

But whatever. If you want to keep arguing this topic ad nauseum, more power to you. If you want to waste time tracking bits of data on what YOU think works best based on your own opinion and of those you play with regularly, fine. I don't mind what people want to do with their time. But stop pretending like your opinion on that matter is somehow more objectively correct about what is best for everyone (which is how you come off). People can like stuff you think is wrong or stupid and shouldn't have to be subjected to you putting them through the wringer for having an opinion counter to yours.

 

[BGinGA]

Geez, Francis, lighten up on your panties squeeze.

Just because you see no need for substantive proof to back up logic, don't downplay it's importance to others. It's merely another tool to help people make informed decisions.

Not sure why you've taken such a hostile stance here, as I just asked a simple and serious question. Sorry if that somehow offended you.

 

[Frogzilla]

Gicen your stances in other thread that antes have minimal impact on gameplay, asking for “oh do you have stats to back it up”, (which of course he doesn’t, who tracks VPIP live when they are running a home game tourney), sounds like picking a fight

 

[Sprinsd]

I like when @BGinGA digs deep into these issues. That means I don’t have to.....Basically any threads on structure and rules I will just skip all responses until I come to his since I assume he had done all the necessary research to provide his answer...

 

[Daddy N]

Can someone please link to the "other thread" on BBA?

 

[BGinGA]

Gicen your stances in other thread that antes have minimal impact on gameplay, asking for “oh do you have stats to back it up”, (which of course he doesn’t, who tracks VPIP live when they are running a home game tourney), sounds like picking a fight

That's hardly what I asked for here, nor was it asked in the flippant and dismissive way you phrased it.

I'm guessing that he ran T100-base tournaments before he decided to run them with a BBA to promote additional action. Or maybe he didn't, or maybe he just switched from regular antes to table antes. I merely asked if he had any data comparing the two (with and without BBA). That's hardly picking a fight.

 

[Frogzilla]

That's hardly what I asked for here, nor was it asked in the flippant and dismissive way you phrased it.

I'm guessing that he ran T100-base tournaments before he decided to run them with a BBA to promote additional action. Or maybe he didn't, or maybe he just switched from regular antes to table antes. I merely asked if he had any data comparing the two (with and without BBA). That's hardly picking a fight.

I’m merely informing you how your comment was perceived

 

[Legend5555]

It's not that BB first is wrong, it's that BBA is wrong in the first damn place. Worst decision in poker ever.

Plenty, and I've never considered it an issue big enough to require a fucked-up rule change that creates new issues. Maybe it's just a problem in Norway (never played there).

It's not fair. Neither is the alternative. And exactly why it's a fucked-up rule, no matter how implemented.

Given your language on the issue in prior threads quoted above, it should really come as no surprise how I and some others perceived your post earlier in this thread.

Not many others are using such colorful language when talking about BBA. Even if they don't like BBA.

 

[JustinInMN]

Can someone please link to the "other thread" on BBA?

I am guess there have been at least a dozen .

EDIT: This is probably what I would consider the most recent one.

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/big-blind-ante-cant-post-his-blind-and-the-entire-ante.51202/

 

[Legend5555]

That's hardly what I asked for here, nor was it asked in the flippant and dismissive way you phrased it.

I'm guessing that he ran T100-base tournaments before he decided to run them with a BBA to promote additional action. Or maybe he didn't, or maybe he just switched from regular antes to table antes. I merely asked if he had any data comparing the two (with and without BBA). That's hardly picking a fight.

I'm just curious in what world was your initial question reasonable? Even if I played a tournament once a week for 2 years with and without antes, that still wouldn't be nearly enough of a data set to draw a meaningful conclusion from that could ever apply to anyone outside of possibly my own group.

*Edit*
Not to mention it would require me to manually track what's happening (possibly at multiple tables) throughout the tournament.

 

[BGinGA]

My question above had far less to do with BBA vs the measurable effects of antes (of any kind) on game play. To wit:

Just by basic logic, more money in the pot preflop to win should widen general raising ranges from most positions, and should up the BB defending range for to pot odds.

I agree, it should do those things, but is there any emperical data that supports that it actually does do those things, and to what degree is the actual impact vs hypothetical?

Having this type of information available would be useful for creating structures tailored to meet specific game play goals.

 

[BGinGA]

For example.... in your structure, what differences in play have you observed between L1 (100/100, no ante) and L2 (100/100, 100 BBA). Any? None? Significantly more action, less, or the same in both levels? Larger or smaller bet sizing with more initial dead money in the pot? A general tendency for players to defend the BB?

Even if not specifically tracked or hard data collected, I would expect that a diligent and thinking poker player would have made some type of observation(s) concerning the two. And I'm not speaking of what 'should' happen, but what has been observed to 'actually' happen.

In one of our current structures, the L3 100/200 level is followed by an L4 100/200 25 ante level, so similar data, observations, and comparisons can be gleaned from play during those two levels as well.

 

[Legend5555]

My question above had far less to do with BBA vs the measurable effects of antes (of any kind) on game play. To wit:

I agree, it should do those things, but is there any emperical data that supports that it actually does do those things, and to what degree is the actual impact vs hypothetical?

Having this type of information available would be useful for creating structures tailored to meet specific game play goals.

If you want to take the time to do that, you are more than welcome to. I'm not doing your homework for you. Sounds like a massive waste of time to me given that I suspect the overwhelming majority of players are not going to care enough one way or the other about what effects your small changes have on the game. Plus any useable data you come up with will only really be applicable to your own group.

In the grand scheme of things you are playing with such a small subsection of players, that it might be true that an ante has very little effect on the games you play. I'm also fairly sure that 4-8 hour long tournaments of 30 people or less are probably not a great overall indicator of how an ante affects the game.

As I've said multiple times in multiple threads on the issue, in small home tournaments using or not using an ante probably has little effect. Maybe I'm imagining that it promotes action in my games, who knows? But I know for sure it changes the way I choose to play hands, because it should if I want to play optimally. Whether other people adapt to that correctly or not is out of my control. So just because you think it may have a negligible effect, doesn't mean that using an ante is nearly pointless. It has a real effect on how people should play. And those that play to that fact will have an edge in the long run.

 

[Legend5555]

Like I said, arguing antes with you is a pointless exercise. We've made our positions very clear. I have no idea what you are hoping to gain from these discussions any more.