Tourney Tournament Payout Question (1 Viewer)

[TexRex]

I'd like to know the following:

1 -- Payout schedules for various tournaments. How it's determined, percentages or amounts.

2 -- Opinion about payouts for this scenario --

• $30 buy-in
• No re-buys
• Players range from 8-30 but average 13-14
• All money paid in is paid out as prize money
• 10 players per table, but would you change it if it was 8 (up to 32 players) or 9 (up to 27 players) per table.

I'm asking because a player has suggested a very different payout schedule. I'd like to know what others are doing to compare to what our group is doing.

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[BGinGA]

For our 2-table league events, it's 25% of field size for $$, 33% of field size for points. Bigger stand-alone events pay 20% of field size.

 

[Ronoh]

9-15 runners, 3 places:
50%
30%
20%

16-22, 4 places:
40%
30%
20%
10%

23-29, 5 places:
40%
27%
15%
10%
8%

30+, 6 places:
37%
25%
15%
10%
7.5%
5.5%

 

[Mojo1312]

Most home tournaments I play in pay-out 25% of the field. I paid out top three in my 14 to 16 player tournament. I prefer fewer pay-out's with roughly equal graduations over a broader, top-heavy structure.

For example, I factored 27 players into my pay-out schedule - top four for 18 players and top five for 26.

Top four:

42%
27.5%
18%
12.5%
(5th place would pay-out 2x the buy-in for 26 players, and then the above percentages to the top four finisher's.)

Versus a relatively common top five pay-out structure of:

45%
25%
15%
10%
5%

Comparing the two based upon 22 players with the latter structure paying out 25% of the field in a $50 freeze-out tournament:

$1100 prize pool

First place: $460
Second: $305
Third: $200
Fourth: $135

The latter:

First place: $495
Second: $275
Third: $165
Fourth: $110
Fifth: $55

I also like 8 players to a table over 9, with the exception of the final table, but to each their own.

 

[TexRex]

Thanks so much for the replies. I'm asking the following about how many at a table because what a person has suggested a number of payouts based on the number of tables and not based on the number of participants. Does that make any difference to anyone?

BG (and others), do y'all do 8, 9, or 10 to a table? Does it change for the final table?

For others (and BG), would you mind sharing number of participants where you add another payout place? For example (and I'm interested in opinions on this), here is our current breakdown of payout places:
8-9 -- 3 places
10-14 -- 4 places
15-20 -- 5 places
21-27 -- 6 places
28-30 -- 7 places
We try for 10 to a table max, but if I have 21 and am only able to do 2 tables that night, I'll do 11 and 10, but that's very rare. I'd rather have the 21st player's money in than turn them away.

Mojo, how many do you like at the final table?

One other question I have that may be difficult to answer ~ Does the number of payout places vary with a recreational game vs. a serious game for a home poker tournament?

Are there others willing to share what they do?

Thanks again!

 

[upNdown]

I haven’t hired a lot of tournaments, but the few times I have, ive tried to keep it to paying 25%. Which to me, means two at an 8 person table. I suppose if I had a 10 person table, I could have my arm twisted into paying top 3, but I wouldn’t increase that to 4 until we hit 16 players.
I’ve read a lot about this from people who host regularly. I can definitely understand paying a higher percentage of people, if you’re looking to get your lower caliber players to continue showing up regularly. There’s a lot of sense in that.

 

[Trihonda]

I’m usually a cashier at my home games, so I would benefit personally from a more top heavy structure. That said, I try to pay around 25% because I think it’s more friendly to the casual player. For a single table, I do 3 spots, two tables I pay 4-5; three tables I pay 6. I base this on actual numbers of players Vs number of tables, but it’s usual similar. I keep a spreadsheet on hand for various buyins I host. It lists number of players, and the payouts. I don’t have to recreate it each time. I also don’t stick to exact percentages, as it’s much easier to round to the nearest $5.

 

[pltrgyst]

The rule of thumb in BARGE and most other tourneys I've played is to pay 30% of the field. That's what I did in my home game as well.

 

[upNdown]

The rule of thumb in BARGE and most other tourneys I've played is to pay 30% of the field. That's what I did in my home game as well.

Is that like a recreational standard? Most card room / casino tournament I’ve played in pay like 10-15%

 

[Mojo1312]

The rule of thumb in BARGE and most other tourneys I've played is to pay 30% of the field. That's what I did in my home game as well.

I could not find where they pay-out 30% of the field on their website: https://www.barge.org/barge-2017-tournament-structures.

 

[pltrgyst]

Yeah, sorry guys, brain fart. My game paid 30%, which was an old rule of thumb from someone's book that worked well for us for 25 years.

BARGE had been paying 15% for the past 5-6 years, but recently reduced that a bit, from a start at ~16% gradually diminishing with an increased number of entries to 10%.

The current payout table is available at barge.org > BARGE > BARGE 2017 Tournament Structures > Download Payout Structures, in PDF.

 

[Gunnar]

I pay number of tables +1
So one table tournament then top 2
two table then top 3.

Lately I have been paying the bubble just over the buy in.
So three tables.
Buy in 100$
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. should be the bubble but I put 130$ then it stopped people from always making a bubble deal

 

[T_Chan]

At my games which are usually 16-30 players, I always pay top 20% rounded up.

 

[Mojo1312]

@TexRex, I based my pay-out structure upon the standard that a 9 player tournament pays out top 3. From there, I added one pay-out for 18 players, and another one for every 8 players thereafter.

8 players at a table allows you to get rid of the ends. Dealing is easier, and silly as it sounds, I believe it also sharpens the focus of the players. I combine tables when there are nine players remaining. (Everyone likes to have a spot at the final table, even if they don't finish in the money.)

If you have three tables and 19 to 21 players, use all three tables. Why sit 10 or 11 players at one table if avoidable?

One other question I have that may be difficult to answer ~ Does the number of payout places vary with a recreational game vs. a serious game for a home poker tournament?

^ I think this is the nub of your post. To me, yes. The former pays out 25% of the field, the latter no more than 20%. As the host, you have to know where your players fall in that spectrum.

Indications of a recreational tournament:

1) A structure that forces a conclusion to the game. (Ends when there is less than 25BB's left on the table.)

2) The tournament is proceeded by a cash game.

On the subject of pay-out structures: I made it to heads up in a 9 player tournament. Neither of us had a real chip advantage over the other. The button limped in with pocket fives. I raised with AD,4D. He flatted. The flop came 2D,5D,XC. I C-bet. He calls a second time. The turn card: AH. I bet once more, he moves all in. I realized at that moment I likely had the worst hand. I knew this player well. I thought he had a better Ace, two pairs, or in a worse case scenario, connectors for the straight. (I did not place him on a set.) I could not fold because I had committed the bulk of my stack. I called and hit a diamond on the river. I profited $140 as a 3 to 1 dog. He profited $70.

This hand could have occurred as easily in a larger top heavy 18 player event. Thereby, it is reasonable for one to take a friendly view of a flatter pay-out structure which distributes the pay-outs proportionately.

Alternatively to adding a pay-out: Players can create a pool for the bubble boy when they are one elimination away from the money by pulling out of pocket and placing on the table a pre-determined amount in the form of a $5 or $10 bill.

I have only played in one tournament that paid out 30% of the field. A 120BB $25 + $5 bounty, unlimited re-buy, multi table tournament with a $25 optional add-on during the first break. (Fun weekend game. Most of the players were there to have a good time.)

 

[TexRex]

Mojo, first, thanks for your feedback! Second, I'll answer your questions.

We use 2 dealers int he middle of either of my rectangular tables or my oval table. I'm not sure how you do your dealing, but I found 2 dealers in the middle makes dealing fairly easy.

I didn't always have 3 tables. I acquired a third when I was consistently getting 21 players and we were playing 11/10 with a Final Table of 10. Since, if I've had 21 sign up, we get out the third table. We seem to be using it about 1x/yr right now.

I recently had 21 sign up. Due to a minor first floor flood, my third table was not easily available. Because we had stuff stacked in the garage until flood damage was repaired, getting to that table would have been a nightmare. As moving stuff out there was done quickly to prevent damage, no thought was given to the stack blocking access to the table. I had 21 sign up and said I'd accommodate 21 at 2 tables rather than turn someone away.

We are used to 10 at a table and all my tables will accommodate 10 without being too cramped, though I have one that is a little tight with 10, but very doable.

On the alternatives to adding a payout: My player suggested a bad beat pool and a high hand pool. I guess a "bubble" bonus is also a possibility. While I'm personally not a fan of those, I'd do them if it brought in more players without costing me anyone.

I'd say ours is definitely recreational. When I've polled players on this subject, I consistently have gotten that most prefer more payout slots. However, I will probably ask again in a broad ranging poll of topics. Oddly in past polls, players who would seem to not benefit from fewer payout slots are the ones who have voted for it; players who would seem to benefit the most vote for more payout slots.

Thanks so much for the feedback back everyone!

 

[Gunnar]

I once had 11 players turn up in a self deal game. We fixed that the dealer sits out. So then there are always 10 players and one dealer.

 

[ChaosRock]

7-8 runners, 2 places:
70%
30%

9-16 runners, 3 places:
50%
30%
20%

17-24, 4 places:
40%
30%
20%
10%

25-32, 5 places:
40%
27%
15%
10%
8%

33+, 6 places:
37%
25%
15%
10%
7.5%
5.5%

FYP slightly to show my payouts... I'm 99% with you, only some very minor changes...

 

[CraigT78]

I pay out 2 spots per full table. I consider 9 to be a full table even though I can squeeze 10. So for me:

9 or less:
60%
40%

9-17:
50%
30%
20%

18-20:
50%
30%
20%
$100

 

[Mojo1312]

Mojo, first, thanks for your feedback! Second, I'll answer your questions.

We use 2 dealers int he middle of either of my rectangular tables or my oval table. I'm not sure how you do your dealing, but I found 2 dealers in the middle makes dealing fairly easy.

On the alternatives to adding a payout: My player suggested a bad beat pool and a high hand pool. I guess a "bubble" bonus is also a possibility. While I'm personally not a fan of those, I'd do them if it brought in more players without costing me anyone.

We used the same dealing method. Much easier for us than shuffling one behind or one ahead.

I made the majority of decisions for my home game. I consulted two good friends/fellow players on the rare occasions where I felt I could benefit from their feedback. You have one player pushing for what the crowd would like to have - a greater number of pay-outs. Overall, I believe listening and responding to your players is good for the game.

I would not frame players pitching in $5 or $10 on the bubble for the player who finishes outside the money as a bonus. All the players are voluntarily making the contribution. One of them will be the bubble boy. It is more like a goodwill gesture. Collectively, they are insuring that whoever bubbles will at least get their buy-in back, because next time it could be one of them.

You have a generous pay-out structure as is. You pay-out top five when you have 15 players. Six players pooling in $5 or $10 for the bubble boy gives that player $30 or $60.

Players don't usually mind doing this because they know they will be finishing in the money.

A HHJ at tournaments is not uncommon where I am from. I usually don't participate. Both tournaments that give players the option charge $5. They would write down the first or last names of the players who paid the $5 on a piece of paper and stuff the money in an envelope.

I will get the pay-out structure based on the number of players for the game I mentioned in my last post so you can compare it to yours.

 

[TexRex]

Mojo, to clarify, the player has suggested fewer payout slots. More specifically, 1 for each table +1 additional.

I'd never heard of pitching in for the bubble -- I was using bonus if we put it into our structure. I honestly think our payouts are enough, but if players think we pay too many, I'd like to know that. The players I will pay the most attention to though are [1] those who are coming and [2] the net donators (losing players) since without them, the others don't have the same game.

Like you, I have a couple of players I can run things by. I also poll the invite list about annually to get feedback. Then I have a couple of people I'll email, and this site to check things out.

I'm building a spreadsheet for comparison purposes -- as I suspected, it varies widely.

Our last place player frequently only gets their money back.

What is "HHJ"? I don't know how your next to last paragraph works -- do you mind explaining?

 

[Mojo1312]

On the alternatives to adding a payout: My player suggested a bad beat pool and a high hand pool. I guess a "bubble" bonus is also a possibility. While I'm personally not a fan of those, I'd do them if it brought in more players without costing me anyone.

I'd say ours is definitely recreational. When I've polled players on this subject, I consistently have gotten that most prefer more payout slots. However, I will probably ask again in a broad ranging poll of topics. Oddly in past polls, players who would seem to not benefit from fewer payout slots are the ones who have voted for it; players who would seem to benefit the most vote for more payout slots.

I misunderstood which direction your player was advocating for in regards to your pay-out structure.

I think having an open ear to your players is wise. May be best not to introduce the pitching in for the bubble idea until you settle on a pay-out structure for your group.

I hosted a single re-buy $45 tournament which included a $5 bounty chip. We usually had one or two re-buys, so whoever finished in the money would win at least 3x their buy-in.

HHJ (High Hand Jackpot) Players who want to participate in the HHJ pay the host $5 and whoever among them scores the best hand during the tournament wins the money.

 

[Mojo1312]

Follow up to my previous posts:

I have played in three different weekly run MT(Home)T's. This is the most generous pay-out schedule that I have seen:

6-9 -- 2 places
10-13 -- 3 places
14-17 -- 4 places
18-21 -- 5 places
22-25 -- 6 places
26-29 -- 7 places
30-33 -- 8 places

My memory didn't serve me very well. I thought they paid out a greater percentage of the field.

 

[stonker]

Would the number of re-buys change the # of positions paid. Say only 9 players start but there are 5 re-buys.
Would the larger prize pool justify a third position paid?

 

[TexRex]

Stonker, it doesn't for us. When we have rebuys, the additional money is added to the prize pool and the winners win more.

 

[Gobbs]

I'm very much in favor of paying a little larger percentage in home games than in typical casino tournaments. 25 percent (give or take) has always seemed about right to me. I'm not saying home games are not serious (they most certainly are), but there is a social aspect to them and people like to have fun. This translates into decreasing the importance of how much is won and increases the importance of simply cashing (although both are still important). People like to be able to say they cashed in tournaments and that keeps them coming back.

Once you establish how many to pay, it's just a matter of how top heavy you want to make it...50/30/20 vs 60/30/10; 50/25/15/10 vs. 40/30/20/10; etc.

 

[stonker]

A friend is hosting a holdem tourney for the first time this weekend and is expecting 18-22 players.
I put the following together to document payouts for this tourney.
Is this a reasonable structure or would you recommend I change it up?

PLAYERS​	BUY-IN​	TOTAL​	1st​	2nd​	3rd​	4th​	%​
5​	$60​	$300​	$300​	​	​	​	100​
6​	$60​	$360​	$252​	$108​	​	​	70/30​
7​	$60​	$420​	$294​	$126​	​	​	70/30​
8​	$60​	$480​	$336​	$144​	​	​	70/30​
9​	$60​	$540​	$378​	$162​	​	​	70/30​
10​	$60​	$600​	$300​	$180​	$120​	​	50/30/20​
11​	$60​	$660​	$330​	$198​	$132​	​	50/30/20​
12​	$60​	$720​	$360​	$216​	$144​	​	50/30/20​
13​	$60​	$780​	$390​	$234​	$156​	​	50/30/20​
14​	$60​	$840​	$420​	$252​	$168​	​	50/30/20​
15​	$60​	$900​	$450​	$270​	$180​	​	50/30/20​
16​	$60​	$960​	$480​	$288​	$192​	​	50/30/20​
17​	$60​	$1,020​	$510​	$306​	$204​	​	50/30/20​
18​	$60​	$1,080​	$540​	$324​	$216​	​	50/30/20​
19​	$60​	$1,140​	$570​	$342​	$228​	​	50/30/20​
20​	$60​	$1,200​	$480​	$360​	$240​	$120​	40/30/20/10​
21​	$60​	$1,260​	$504​	$378​	$252​	$126​	40/30/20/10​
22​	$60​	$1,320​	$528​	$396​	$264​	$132​	40/30/20/10​
23​	$60​	$1,380​	$552​	$414​	$276​	$138​	40/30/20/10​
24​	$60​	$1,440​	$576​	$432​	$288​	$144​	40/30/20/10​
25​	$60​	$1,500​	$600​	$450​	$300​	$150​	40/30/20/10​
26​	$60​	$1,560​	$624​	$468​	$312​	$156​	40/30/20/10​
27​	$60​	$1,620​	$648​	$486​	$324​	$162​	40/30/20/10​
28​	$60​	$1,680​	$672​	$504​	$336​	$168​	40/30/20/10​
29​	$60​	$1,740​	$696​	$522​	$348​	$174​	40/30/20/10​
30​	$60​	$1,800​	$720​	$540​	$360​	$180​	40/30/20/10​

 

[TexRex]

Stonker, I’m not a fan of straight percentage payouts unless you have rebuys. See why:

1st wins more at 9 players, than 10-12; more at 19 players than 20-23. It's harder to win a 10-12 player tournament than a 9 player tournament; and harder to win a 20-23 player tournament than a 19 player tournament.

For 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, the payout never goes down.

 

[DeeVee8]

Ive used this for years. Rather than figuring %'s, I just use buyins. Works no matter what your buy-in is. So if you've got a $60 buy-in and 22 players, 1st place would win 7 buyins, or 420. Second gets 300. No change needed because most people will be paying with 20's.

 

[1A25R]

A screenshot of my Excel calculator with percentages and stuff
In the example for 30 players I pay top 6