When to pay out bounty? (2 Viewers)

[BGinGA]

If a player has the option to rebuy and bounties are only for elimination of a player, it means it is unclear if an all in includes a bounty on the line or not. That can definitely matter in determining an action. Most things in poker rules-wise drive towards clarity, so it would seem the only reasonable option is that a bounty is purchased with each rebuy/reentry/reregistration.

Not necessarily; there are other reasonable options.

If an all-in player still has a re-buy option available, the rules can also state that an all-in player must declare their re-buy intent at the time of their all-in bet -- simply by including their bounty chip with the all-in bet (if choosing to not re-buy), or retaining their bounty chip along with their re-buy chip (if choosing to re-buy if/after losing). The player's declaration is binding.

This simple rule solves the clarity issue for any future action(s) in the current hand.


Although it is true that a player who declines to purchase another bounty chip with their re-buy can subsequently lose and not suffer an additional bounty loss, it is also true that the player is no longer eligible to win any additional bounty chips during the event -- thus increasing the chances of the remaining bounty players to win the remaining bounty chips in play. It simply becomes another strategy decision, and one that is equally available to all players.

 

[ekricket]

In fact, I am having a ridiculously hard time trying to even dream up a real-life situation where it would ever matter.

Maybe if you have a player that specializes in targeting short stack bounties with the goal of collecting 5-6 per game?

I guess if it doesn't matter, why use it? Why add extra shit to your game needlessly - especially if it seems to be so confusing to veteran players that nobody can agree precisely on the way to do it. Imagine casual players who barely understand poker concepts and then try to explain why this is a “desired enhancement”. You may as well just have a prize wheel that you spin after a player is knocked out to see if the winner gets a silver star or a gold star if it’s meaningless.

If it’s confusing and can be arbitrarily decided it’s not going to bring people back. And if I go to a game that one aspect of it - that has nothing to do with how the game is played - has to be explained in this kind of detail down to the exact terminology and semantics, well…. It’s just not a “fun thing” to do. May as well roll a dice to see if straights best flushes before every deal.

 

[MrCatPants]

Ok. I'm about to engage in a debate that I'm really not all that passionate about.

re:

I will concede the point if the value of the bounty is so great compared to the ICM of the stacks, that it would alter the EV of the call.

In most situations, it will not. In fact, I am having a ridiculously hard time trying to even dream up a real-life situation where it would ever matter. Most home game bounties are a fraction of the prize pool. 10% seems pretty common for all bounties, so if you had a 10 player game, each bounty is 10% of that 10%, or 1% of the prize pool. Get 20 player games like I run closer to, and a single bounty is 0.5% of the prize pool. Now run a 30-40 player game of @BGinGA standards, and you are at one quarter of one percent.

On what range are you basing a call vs fold decision on less than a 1% change in the expected value?

If my math is wrong, please correct me. I'm not being confrontational, I'm just seriously lost.

If the bounties are so small, why run a bounty tournament in the first place? You'd have to collect 10 bounties just to recoup your buy-in. In my experience, most bounties are somewhere between 25%-50% to make them more significant.

And ultimately, the bounty EV would generally outweigh the chip EV in most hands. For instance, in an all in on the first hand, if the bounty is 33% of each buyin (leaving 67% for the prize pool) the bounty is more or less worth 50% of the stack. It actually really matters a great deal and should greatly widen calling ranges with a bounty in play.

re:

Not necessarily; there are other reasonable options.

If an all-in player still has a re-buy option available, the rules can also state that an all-in player must declare their re-buy intent at the time of their all-in bet -- simply by including their bounty chip with the all-in bet (if choosing to not re-buy), or retaining their bounty chip along with their re-buy chip (if choosing to re-buy if/after losing). The player's declaration is binding.

This simple rule solves the clarity issue for any future action(s) in the current hand.


Although it is true that a player who declines to purchase another bounty chip with their re-buy can subsequently lose and not suffer an additional bounty loss, it is also true that the player is no longer eligible to win any additional bounty chips during the event -- thus increasing the chances of the remaining bounty players to win the remaining bounty chips in play. It simply becomes another strategy decision, and one that is equally available to all players.

This is something I think that is well intended, but players would forget and you'd end up with arguments at the table. And some potential angle shooting.

One other item related to both of these too, I've always understood that coming in late and/or rebuying into a bounty tournament is pretty -EV. You cover almost no one so your ability (unless you chip up) to actually win bounty chips is greatly reduced.

 

[BGinGA]

I will concede the point if the value of the bounty is so great compared to the ICM of the stacks, that it would alter the EV of the call.

In most situations, it will not. In fact, I am having a ridiculously hard time trying to even dream up a real-life situation where it would ever matter. Most home game bounties are a fraction of the prize pool. 10% seems pretty common for all bounties, so if you had a 10 player game, each bounty is 10% of that 10%, or 1% of the prize pool. Get 20 player games like I run closer to, and a single bounty is 0.5% of the prize pool. Now run a 30-40 player game of @BGinGA standards, and you are at one quarter of one percent.

On what range are you basing a call vs fold decision on less than a 1% change in the expected value?

If my math is wrong, please correct me. I'm not being confrontational, I'm just seriously lost.

You are correct; under most bounty tournament conditions -- ie, bounty value = 10%-20% of buy-in value -- it will have little to no impact on action decisions (and totally irrelevant, if using a declare rule).

But hypothetically looking at the extreme example -- a bounty-only event with no secondary prize-pool buy-in -- it becomes pretty clear that action is affected if re-buy intent is unclear.

But at what point between 20% and 100% bounty value does fold/call/raise become a viable strategy decision based on bounty inclusion? 50% bounty value? Probably. 35%? Possibly. But again, using a simple declare rule completely eliminates the uncertainty surrounding subsequent action decisions.

 

[Colquhoun]

On what range are you basing a call vs fold decision on less than a 1% change in the expected value?

You can’t compare the bounty to the EV of the entire prize pool…unless you expect to win the whole prize pool.
I’m not that good yet.

 

[krafticus]

Just adding in my crap ...
My tournament buy-in's are $60. $40 goes to the main pot, $10 is the bounty, and $10 is pulled for the year-end freeroll. The bounty is 20% of the main game buy-in ($50). Bounties in my game are associated to your stack. Lose a stack, lose a bounty. I also award extra points for bounties (100 extra points, but my point system is complex and a subject for another thread). Because of this, we do have bounty hunters in my game. Many times when a player is all-in and a tough decision is to be made, the bounty (and bonus) weigh in on that. 6 bounties won = freeroll and 600 extra points/chips for the final game.

Not all players are bounty hunters. The player this past season with the most points collected 11 bounties over 11 games. The player in 10th had 4 bounties over the course of the season (8 games played). 2nd most points had 26 bounties over 9 games. 2nd place had enough extra points to boost them from 4th to 2nd.

I also allow a player to surrender their stack if they are below 5k at the end of the rebuy period (49% of the starting stack or less). If they do this, they will retain their original bounty and gain a second chip. If they get knocked out, the player doing the dirty work will collect both bounties.

This is what works for me and my game. I've never had a complaint. I even asked my group if I should remove the bounty, and got a 99% "NO" response. (you just can't make everyone happy, no matter what).

 

[JustinInMN]

Back to the OP...

I prefer to pay the bounty with cashouts, but if players wish to leave, I'll pay them at break. asking for your bounty payment while the host/banker is still playing is just rude.

I don't agree with this. If the host is in the middle of a hand sure he can wait a couple minutes. But I find paying a bounty chip less effort than a reload in a cash game. I'm not going to make that player wait for a tournament break. Especially since we usually go 90-100 minutes between breaks.

 

[MrCatPants]

Just adding in my crap ...
My tournament buy-in's are $60. $40 goes to the main pot, $10 is the bounty, and $10 is pulled for the year-end freeroll. The bounty is 20% of the main game buy-in ($50). Bounties in my game are associated to your stack. Lose a stack, lose a bounty. I also award extra points for bounties (100 extra points, but my point system is complex and a subject for another thread). Because of this, we do have bounty hunters in my game. Many times when a player is all-in and a tough decision is to be made, the bounty (and bonus) weigh in on that. 6 bounties won = freeroll and 600 extra points/chips for the final game.

Not all players are bounty hunters. The player this past season with the most points collected 11 bounties over 11 games. The player in 10th had 4 bounties over the course of the season (8 games played). 2nd most points had 26 bounties over 9 games. 2nd place had enough extra points to boost them from 4th to 2nd.

I also allow a player to surrender their stack if they are below 5k at the end of the rebuy period (49% of the starting stack or less). If they do this, they will retain their original bounty and gain a second chip. If they get knocked out, the player doing the dirty work will collect both bounties.

This is what works for me and my game. I've never had a complaint. I even asked my group if I should remove the bounty, and got a 99% "NO" response. (you just can't make everyone happy, no matter what).

I used to do exactly this, but ended up dropping the bounties two years ago as it was a points and payouts pain in the posterior.

+3 alliteration points for Catpants.

 

[krafticus]

I used to do exactly this, but ended up dropping the bounties two years ago as it was a points and payouts pain in the posterior.

+3 alliteration points for Catpants.

I export from Tournament Director right into an excel spreadsheet for all points. Tournament Director tracks that, and adds a column in the export. It's a quick copy/paste and done. As for the payouts, I have an envelope full of $10's that I just pull from to pay them out. Now that I think about it, I'll just keep that envelope in my pocket and payout the bounties right away, and adjudicate the balance once the night is over.

I do love Tournament Director though, as it does everything for me. (best $ I've ever spent for poker)

 

[BGinGA]

If the bounties are so small, why run a bounty tournament in the first place?

Simple answer? To generate additional excitement, and to theoretically spread the prize money around to more players. Both can be desirable to tournament organizers, pending circumstances with the player pool.

If an all-in player still has a re-buy option available, the rules can also state that an all-in player must declare their re-buy intent at the time of their all-in bet -- simply by including their bounty chip with the all-in bet (if choosing to not re-buy), or retaining their bounty chip along with their re-buy chip (if choosing to re-buy if/after losing). The player's declaration is binding.

This is something I think that is well intended, but players would forget and you'd end up with arguments at the table. And some potential angle shooting.

My experience is that those issues do not arise in actual play. Dealers ask the all-in player if their bounty chip is included in their bet (if present and not already included). And since the player's decision is binding, there are no angle-shooting opportunities.

One other item related to both of these too, I've always understood that coming in late and/or rebuying into a bounty tournament is pretty -EV. You cover almost no one so your ability (unless you chip up) to actually win bounty chips is greatly reduced.

This is a totally relevant observation. Late arrival to a bounty tournament can be -EV, although theoretically a late arrival will still cover some players (those that have lost chips) and not cover the other players (those who have increased their stack size).

And re-buying into any tournament structure is typically -EV, regardless of structure.

But re-buying into a bounty tournament is definitely -EV, but only if the purchase of an additional bounty chip is required (for the reasons you stated). So from an organizer's perspective, it's a decision between encouraging re-buys (optional bounty purchase) vs imposing an additional -EV penalty on re-buy players (mandatory bounty purchase).

 

[JustinInMN]

To the original post. I pay out the bounty when the player leaves. Usually our bounties are $5, $10, $20 depending on the stake of the tournament, it's not hard to pick that out of the cash for the tournament when a player leaves.

If the bounties are so small, why run a bounty tournament in the first place? You'd have to collect 10 bounties just to recoup your buy-in. In my experience, most bounties are somewhere between 25%-50% to make them more significant.

I kind of like the 15-25% window myself. This year I have done $35+5, $50+10, and $80+20 tournaments. If you get a few bounties it's still good money, but most of it is still playing for the prize pool.

As for the other questions that have come up here. I know I have had previous argument with @BGinGA and @Poker Zombie , but I 100% believe bounties should be tied to a stack, not the player. We had a pretty epic thread on this (click here) earlier this year. But anything other than tying bounties to stacks at the very least leads to an unclear conversation as to whether or not the winning player has earned the bounty, in a worst case scenario, it can open doors to favoritism and hard feelings. Tying the bounty to a stack and not the player is superior in terms of fairness and simplicity, which should be the top two criteria for evaluating any rules.

 

[MrCatPants]

I export from Tournament Director right into an excel spreadsheet for all points. Tournament Director tracks that, and adds a column in the export. It's a quick copy/paste and done. As for the payouts, I have an envelope full of $10's that I just pull from to pay them out. Now that I think about it, I'll just keep that envelope in my pocket and payout the bounties right away, and adjudicate the balance once the night is over.

View attachment 1225141

I do love Tournament Director though, as it does everything for me. (best $ I've ever spent for poker)

I moved to a bankers bag on a lanyard around my neck and it's been great when dealing with multiple tables. I'll put rebuy chips in there too for easy transport.

 

[wickedwonka121]

Back to the OP...

I prefer to pay the bounty with cashouts, but if players wish to leave, I'll pay them at break. asking for your bounty payment while the host/banker is still playing is just rude.

I actually lost track of $210 in buys (cash game), cause I was trying to be the nice guy and reload players asap. The bank was balanced, but the poker tools app was missing $210. So I'll be harder on the reloads, basically making everyone take a quick break so I can keep my records straight.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I don't agree with this. If the host is in the middle of a hand sure he can wait a couple minutes. But I find paying a bounty chip less effort than a reload in a cash game. I'm not going to make that player wait for a tournament break. Especially since we usually go 90-100 minutes between breaks.

My games have breaks roughly on the hour, so a little easier to wait.

Beyond that, I am as much a player in my tournaments as anyone else. That means my seat is random. If someone needs money, there is a high likelihood that I will have to get up and make a number of other players also get up or sqoosh-in, just so I can get to the cash box, because you are impatient.

Mind you, I will do it. It's just rude, and deducts from your Hall of Fame points (actions that inconvenience the host).

@MrCatPants lanyard thing is pretty cool, but if I kept all the rebuy stacks in there I would have neck-pain issues for sure.

 

[Poker Zombie]

You can’t compare the bounty to the EV of the entire prize pool…unless you expect to win the whole prize pool.
I’m not that good yet.

I told you I am bad at poker.

ICM is a thing though. I just don't calculate for it. I either win, or I lose. Sometimes if I lose I get consolation money. But I play for 1st.

 

[JustinInMN]

eyond that, I am as much a player in my tournaments as anyone else. That means my seat is random. If someone needs money, there is a high likelihood that I will have to get up and make a number of other players also get up or sqoosh-in, just so I can get to the cash box, because you are impatient.

Mind you, I will do it. It's just rude, and deducts from your Hall of Fame points (actions that inconvenience the host).

Ah. See, I always claim Table 1, Seat 1 as host privilege so I am always near the money and the chips for facilitating re-entries. (Everyone still draws random around me except for accommodations I make for certain players with physical limitations.) That said, even with your arrangement, you must have to go get chips for re-entries and whatnot at some point. And I assume those players aren't waiting an hour. I don't see how paying bounties is any less convenient than that.

 

[krafticus]

Ah. See, I always claim Table 1, Seat 1 as host privilege so I am always near the money and the chips for facilitating re-entries. (Everyone still draws random around me except for accommodations I make for certain players with physical limitations.) That said, even with your arrangement, you must have to go get chips for re-entries and whatnot at some point. And I assume those players aren't waiting an hour. I don't see how paying bounties is any less convenient than that.

I do something similar. I randomize the seating, and whatever table I end up at, I switch with a player (if needed) that gives me the ability to get up easier to handle bust outs, money, and all other things. Once we get to the final table, I just bring everything to the table with me.

 

[MrCatPants]

Ah. See, I always claim Table 1, Seat 1 as host privilege so I am always near the money and the chips for facilitating re-entries. (Everyone still draws random around me except for accommodations I make for certain players with physical limitations.)

Same. #seat1table1squad

 

[Poker Zombie]

Ah. See, I always claim Table 1, Seat 1 as host privilege so I am always near the money and the chips for facilitating re-entries. (Everyone still draws random around me except for accommodations I make for certain players with physical limitations.) That said, even with your arrangement, you must have to go get chips for re-entries and whatnot at some point. And I assume those players aren't waiting an hour. I don't see how paying bounties is any less convenient than that.

I set up rebuy tubes and keep them close at hand, but the table space is limited in most seating locations. There just isn't always room for the cash box too.

We award Seat 1 Table 1 to the player that had the highest finish at the previous event, unless we have a mobility-limited participant. Seat 1 tables 2 and 3 go to the the next two highest finishes. It's unorthodox, certainly, but it's a carry over from our earliest MTTs. Most of our players back then had little or no previous experience, so spreading out the top finishers made sure the rookie wasn't going to just get crushed (in theory). As a result, I don't get a "host's seat", as is super common.

I assume hosts that are seat-locked are also immune to being moved for table balancing?

 

[krafticus]

I assume hosts that are seat-locked are also immune to being moved for table balancing?

I don't lock anyone in a seat, and I've been the 1st moved on occasion. I make it work, and for the most part, people help out when possible. I've got 5-6 people that could run my game without me there, which helps a ton

 

[MrCatPants]

I don't lock anyone in a seat, and I've been the 1st moved on occasion. I make it work, and for the most part, people help out when possible. I've got 5-6 people that could run my game without me there, which helps a ton

I do lock myself for rebalancing in my game.

 

[JustinInMN]

I assume hosts that are seat-locked are also immune to being moved for table balancing?

In my game, once the re-entry period closes, the host is fair game, and would be part of any redraw for the final table. But during the entry period we seldom have to balance tables. But I do have the privilege of keeping my office chair in any event .