Tourney T20,000 starting breakdown (2 Viewers)

[ThrowBack]

Help me design our club tournament. With my group being all rec players and we only do cash games I want the blinds to be between 25-30 minutes to allow players to deal and adjust to the blinds moving up, higher demons, and tournament play

Looking to have 12-16 players and wrap up in under 3.5 hours.

Santa brought me a tournament chipset, with the idea to use Chris Manzonis 20k chip breakdown
8-25
8-100
6-500
6-1000
2-5000

And his blind structure starting at 25/50 and moves up pretty standard.

Is this structure doable? Or what adjustments should I make to keep on that timeline and keep the longer line structures to see people comfortable. I would be fine and rather adjust the stack depth (can drop 5-10k) or start at a higher blind

Any feedback?

 

[allforcharity]

I'd drop the stack to 10k, start at 50/100 and 20min blinds

50/100
75/150
100/200
150/300
break and colour up 25
200/400
300/600
400/800
600/1200
800/1600
break and colour up 100
1000/2000
1500/3000
2000/4000
3000/6000
4000/8000
should end fairly soon after this

 

[ThrowBack]

Just drop the two 5k chips?

 

[RocAFella1]

Just drop the two 5k chips?

Yup

 

[Preditor]

As @allforcharity said, drop the blind levels to 20 minutes. It will not seem like a turbo, I promise. People adjust to the blinds rather quickly, wishing one or two hands.

Maybe you have people who love playing poker, but it will greatly extend the length of your tournament if you go over 20 min.

 

[ThrowBack]

Maybe you have people who love playing poker, but it will greatly extend the length of your tournament if you go over 20 min.

everyone would be fine if it runs over

 

[BGinGA]

blinds to be between 25-30 minutes

12-16 players and wrap up in under 3.5 hours.

blind structure starting at 25/50 and moves up pretty standard.

Is this structure doable?

Nope. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Tournament structures consist of three factors: total chips in play (# players x stack size), blind increases (percentage increase per level), and time (per blind level).

More chips, smaller increases, and/or longer levels = longer tournaments. Fewer chips, larger increases, and/or shorter levels = shorter tournaments.

Most (decent) home game tournaments have a compromise combination of the three that use 150bb-200bb starting stacks, average blind increases (35-50%), and relatively short blind levels (15-20 minutes), that result in an event lasting between 4-5 hours for 10-20 players.

But an event with longer 25-30 minute blinds usinf 40% increases for 12-16 players with larger 400bb stacks isn't going to finish anywhere near 3.5 hours.

Drop the starting stack sizes down to 10k (8/8/4/7 or 12/12/5/6), shorten the blind levels to 15 minutes, and use the following 100bb structure (40% average increases):

L1 50/100
L2 75/150
L3 100/200
L4 150/300
L5 200/400
remove T25 chips
L6 300/600
L7 400/800
L8 600/1200
L9 800/1600
L10 1100/2200
remove T100 chips
L111500/3000
L12 2000/4000
L13 3000/6000 *eot-12
L14 4000/8000 *eot-16
L15 6000/12000

With the smaller stacks, shorter levels, and bigger starting blinds, the event will last no longer than 3.5 hours plus breaks for 16 players (15-minutes shorter for 12 players).

Add 2.5 hours for 25-minute levels and 200bb stacks.

 

[ThrowBack]

Nope. Can't have your cake and eat it too.

Tournament structures consist of three factors: total chips in play (# players x stack size), blind increases (percentage increase per level), and time (per blind level).

Thank you, I really appreciate this Write up, it’s exactly the kind of thing I have been looking for.

Really I’m just trying to understand how a cake is made.

 

[joeyshin]

Help me design our club tournament. With my group being all rec players and we only do cash games I want the blinds to be between 25-30 minutes to allow players to deal and adjust to the blinds moving up, higher demons, and tournament play

Looking to have 12-16 players and wrap up in under 3.5 hours.

Santa brought me a tournament chipset, with the idea to use Chris Manzonis 20k chip breakdown
8-25
8-100
6-500
6-1000
2-5000

And his blind structure starting at 25/50 and moves up pretty standard.

Is this structure doable? Or what adjustments should I make to keep on that timeline and keep the longer line structures to see people comfortable. I would be fine and rather adjust the stack depth (can drop 5-10k) or start at a higher blind

Any feedback?

This is the starting stacked we used for T20k

 

[joeyshin]

We run three tables and start at 25/50 but blinds toward end jump fast. Our game has rebuys first 6 levels and addons at first break so we go over 3.5 hours but we finish in 6 hours.

 

[ScottBoom]

Thanks for all of your input. I am getting ready to run my first tourney this weekend and all of your comments and recommendations have given me a lot to think about. Most of the people that are coming are friends, but i am not sure how serious they are about poker. I have no problem with a game lasting 5 or 6 hours, but i have a feeling that the people coming will get antsy if the game goes that long. I was following a structure similar to the OP's, but now i think i am going to eliminate the level one blind and start with level 2. I guess we will see how it goes and make adjustments for future tournaments.

 

[JustinInMN]

Santa brought me a tournament chipset, with the idea to use Chris Manzonis 20k chip breakdown
8-25
8-100
6-500
6-1000
2-5000

I just like to point out that @Chris Manzoni is one of us .

His channel is full of great hosting information.

 

[ScottBoom]

I just like to point out that @Chris Manzoni is one of us .

His channel is full of great hosting information.

Yes Sir. I have watched his videos and found them very helpful. Working on putting together a custom poker chip set now.

 

[BGinGA]

Yes Sir. I have watched his videos and found them very helpful. Working on putting together a custom poker chip set now.

Fwiw, I feel his 8/8/6/6 stack configuration recommendations are misguided.

 

[ScottBoom]

Thanks for your reply. As someone who has no experience, would you mind elaborating. I would be interested I hearing your opinion. Is because in his structure it is 200BB and you recommend 100BB? Or is it the denominations of the starting stack impact play due to making change? Just curious the reasoning.

 

[joeyshin]

Fwiw, I feel his 8/8/6/6 stack configuration recommendations are misguided.

I use 8/8/6/6 and it works great but it’s for 3+ table tourneys because there isn’t huge stacks of small chips if tables combine. If it’s only 1-2 tables then I would do 12/12/7/5

 

[ScottBoom]

I use 8/8/6/6 and it works great but it’s for 3+ table tourneys because there isn’t huge stacks of small chips if tables combine. If it’s only 1-2 tables then I would do 12/12/7/5

Thanks for the advice. We are just doing 1 table at the moment, but I am hoping to build it to 2 tables soon.

 

[Preditor]

Thanks for your reply. As someone who has no experience, would you mind elaborating. I would be interested I hearing your opinion. Is because in his structure it is 200BB and you recommend 100BB? Or is it the denominations of the starting stack impact play due to making change? Just curious the reasoning.

Not trying to speak for BGinGA, but I assume from his other posts that the disagreement is not the number of starting big-blinds, but the chip distribution.

Many people prefer either a 12/12/5/6 breakdown, or a 8/8/4/7 breakdown. Those people would argue the T500 chip is kind of an odd denomination; you never need to use more than one T500 chip per bet. Betting T800? 1xT500 and 3xT100. Betting T2500? 2xT1000 and 1xT500.

So the argument against an 8/8/6/6/x starting stack is that requiring the same number of T500 chips as T1000s is excessive because the T500 is more of a necessity, but never the workhorse chip. So they tend to lean towards an 8/8/4/7 breakdown.

That being said, this is all a matter of opinion. 8/8/6/6 is used by a lot of people on the forum. It really depends on what you want!

 

[joeyshin]

Not trying to speak for BGinGA, but I assume from his other posts that the disagreement is not the number of starting big-blinds, but the chip distribution.

Many people prefer either a 12/12/5/6 breakdown, or a 8/8/4/7 breakdown. The argument is that the T500 chip is kind of an odd denomination and you never need to use more than one T500 chip per bet. Betting T800? 1xT500 and 3xT100. Betting T2500? 2xT1000 and 1xT500.

So the argument against an 8/8/6/6/x starting stack is that requiring the same number of T500 chips as T1000s is excessive because the T500 is more of a necessity, but never the workhorse chip. So they tend to lean towards an 8/8/4/7 breakdown.

That being said, this is all a matter of opinion. 8/8/6/6 is used by a lot of people on the forum. It really depends on what you want!

I’m sold.


Edit: I’d actually like to get rid of the T500 chip. Its use is minimal. Just fills a small gap between T100 and T1k. The T500 also almost always looks out of place. Rarely the good looking chip in a set.

But is t100 to T1k too much of a jump?

 

[Preditor]

I’m sold.

Like you, my tournament set can handle 12/12/5/6 or 8/8/4/7. I have a lot of greener players, so I prefer 12/12/5/6 since that makes them "feel" like they have more chips. I can host up to 16 people with that.

But if I ever grow to more than 16 (though likely not for a while), I can host up to 25 with a 8/8/4/7 configuration. And I had to buy less T500s than if I had budgeted for an 8/8/6/6 configuration, which is what won me over to that.

 

[joeyshin]

Like you, my tournament set can handle 12/12/5/6 or 8/8/4/7. I have a lot of greener players, so I prefer 12/12/5/6 since that makes them "feel" like they have more chips. I can host up to 16 people with that.

But if I ever grow to more than 16 (though likely not for a while), I can host up to 25 with a 8/8/4/7 configuration. And I had to buy less T500s than if I had budgeted for an 8/8/6/6 configuration, which is what won me over to that.

Our tourney is usually 25-27 players. I’m thinking of giving more t100s and T1Ks and getting rid of the t500.

 

[ScottBoom]

Not trying to speak for BGinGA, but I assume from his other posts that the disagreement is not the number of starting big-blinds, but the chip distribution.

Many people prefer either a 12/12/5/6 breakdown, or a 8/8/4/7 breakdown. Those people would argue the T500 chip is kind of an odd denomination; you never need to use more than one T500 chip per bet. Betting T800? 1xT500 and 3xT100. Betting T2500? 2xT1000 and 1xT500.

So the argument against an 8/8/6/6/x starting stack is that requiring the same number of T500 chips as T1000s is excessive because the T500 is more of a necessity, but never the workhorse chip. So they tend to lean towards an 8/8/4/7 breakdown.

That being said, this is all a matter of opinion. 8/8/6/6 is used by a lot of people on the forum. It really depends on what you want!

Thank you for this. That is the logic I was looking for.

 

[Preditor]

Our tourney is usually 25-27 players. I’m thinking of giving more t100s and T1Ks and getting rid of the t500.

Curious as to why you want to do that. I think you do need some T500s. Especially when the big-blinds/antes is in the T600-800 range. I would think it would be a mess of chips to have people need to post 8 T100 chips for a single big-blind.

 

[ScottBoom]

Like you, my tournament set can handle 12/12/5/6 or 8/8/4/7. I have a lot of greener players, so I prefer 12/12/5/6 since that makes them "feel" like they have more chips. I can host up to 16 people with that.

But if I ever grow to more than 16 (though likely not for a while), I can host up to 25 with a 8/8/4/7 configuration. And I had to buy less T500s than if I had budgeted for an 8/8/6/6 configuration, which is what won me over to that.

This is great info. I am looking to buy a tourney set and this helps with considering how much of the denominations to buy.

I bought a cash set from a guy that was running a cash game recently. I didn't realize what I was buying, but I got it for cheap so not a big deal. I am scaling down the denominations for the tourney to make it work for the first one. Going to do:

T-.25 x 8
T-1 x 8
Etc.

Basically scaling down the T-25 numbers by multiplying by .01. It should work, but not ideal. Same scaling with the blinds. It works out to 200 Instead of 20000 starting stack. Starting with .50/1.00 blinds that would be 200 BBs. It should play the same, but some there will be some differences because the jump from 5 to 25 is off from 100 to 1000. I guess it will have to do since it is what I have.

 

[joeyshin]

Curious as to why you want to do that. I think you do need some T500s. Especially when the big-blinds/antes is in the T600-800 range. I would think it would be a mess of chips to have people need to post 8 T100 chips for a single big-blind.

I know. I’m just half joking. But I always thought the t500 to be the weakest chip

 

[Preditor]

I know. I’m just half joking. But I always thought the t500 to be the weakest chip

And many people agree, hence why many prefer 8/8/4/7 over 8/8/6/6.

 

[allforcharity]

Unfortunately, ideal breakdown runs into acquisition cost reality.

If you're using Jack Detroit cash chips in a T25 base structure like above, the last time I looked any of the $1000 chips were going for $32 per. So to get 7 in each stack for a single table will cost you north of $2000.
Even my CDI98 $1k is expensive enough that I can't afford to put more than 5 in each starting stack.

 

[grantc54]

Unfortunately, ideal breakdown runs into acquisition cost reality.

If you're using Jack Detroit cash chips in a T25 base structure like above, the last time I looked any of the $1000 chips were going for $32 per. So to get 7 in each stack for a single table will cost you north of $2000.
Even my CDI98 $1k is expensive enough that I can't afford to put more than 5 in each starting stack.

It's only money. It's also a lot easier to stomach if you purchase over time.

 

[BGinGA]

Edit: I’d actually like to get rid of the T500 chip. Its use is minimal. Just fills a small gap between T100 and T1k. The T500 also almost always looks out of place. Rarely the good looking chip in a set.

But is t100 to T1k too much of a jump?

Definitely yes. It is very unwieldy to require from five up to nine chips of a single denomination to construct a bet, which would be required if eliminating the 500 chip.

I'd also argue that there are a fair number of T500 chips that look outstanding, often much nicer than the T1000s they are paired with.

 

[BGinGA]

I bought a cash set from a guy that was running a cash game recently. I didn't realize what I was buying, but I got it for cheap so not a big deal. I am scaling down the denominations for the tourney to make it work for the first one. Going to do:

T-.25 x 8
T-1 x 8
Etc.

Basically scaling down the T-25 numbers by multiplying by .01. It should work, but not ideal. Same scaling with the blinds. It works out to 200 Instead of 20000 starting stack. Starting with .50/1.00 blinds that would be 200 BBs. It should play the same, but some there will be some differences because the jump from 5 to 25 is off from 100 to 1000. I guess it will have to do since it is what I have.

A T.25-base tournament set (T.25 T1 T5 T20/T25 T100) works great; in fact, it is much more efficient than a T25-base set. It can also be used for actual-cash-value tournaments, eliminating the need for separate cash and tourney sets.