Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?

HAYSIE

I was playing on Super Sunday in the 30k guaranteed, and wondered why people would prefer a bounty hunter. In comparison a non bounty hunter doubles the prize money for all those that cash. So the winner would have got 9k not 4.5k. The winner actually got around 6k including head prizes, so still a massive loss. Isnt double the prize money for all those that cash a massive draw. I realise that players have different views, and that Sky say that the bounty hunters are popular. I have no basis for disputing this.

Do players think they can cover their buy in, or even make a profit without cashing? Although anyone that cashes in a bounty hunter loses money, if compared to a non bounty hunter tourney.

I havent got access to the 30k result, so I looked at yesterdays main event to see how it worked out in practice, rather than in theory,

288 runners, and 30 cashed.

The 30 that cashed got 137 heads between them which is almost 50% of the heads.

The next 20 players that came close to cashing got a further 40 heads.

Therefore the remaining 238 players got the remaining 111 heads.

As the early heads are worth £11.25. then this means that the bottom 238 got an average of around £5 per head on average. The trade off for this was tha prize pool for those that cashed was decimated. 

Would the double prize money on each occasion that you cashed offset the odd head prize?

I only looked at the one tourney so if you looked at more the result may be different, but I thought it was an eye opener.

If you exclude the heads then it brought the prize money of a 30k tourney down to the level of the 15k Sunday Major, and winning a weekday main event is reduced from 2k to 1k because they are bounty hunters.

I know which one I would prefer.

Angmar2626

If you're playing within your bankroll then these points are all valid, and it is odd that the £5.5 bounty hunters get hundreds of runners when the deepstack that runs on weekends gets about 40 even at peak time.

With the Super Sunday 110, if you're playing outside of your bankroll and taking a shot at a special event, the bounty hunter element makes it more attractive as you get a shot at big prize money with more of a chance to offset some of the dent to your bankroll with a head prize or two.

If you sat in and take 1 head, you're already in profit.

I think lots of people find them more fun than freezeouts.

If it's above your normal bankroll then the first place prize is massive for you whether it's reduced by the bounty hunter element or not.

Supporting your points though, another example would be the Mini Major - gets 600+ for 1st whereas the 9.30 11BH gets 300-400 including head prizes on days when it gets similar number of runners.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

If you're playing within your bankroll then these points are all valid, and it is odd that the £5.5 bounty hunters get hundreds of runners when the deepstack that runs on weekends gets about 40 even at peak time. With the Super Sunday 110, if you're playing outside of your bankroll and taking a shot at a special event, the bounty hunter element makes it more attractive as you get a shot at big prize money with more of a chance to offset some of the dent to your bankroll with a head prize or two. If you sat in and take 1 head, you're already in profit. I think lots of people find them more fun than freezeouts. If it's above your normal bankroll then the first place prize is massive for you whether it's reduced by the bounty hunter element or not. Supporting your points though, another example would be the Mini Major - gets 600+ for 1st whereas the 9.30 11BH gets 300-400 including head prizes on days when it gets similar number of runners.
Posted by Angmar2626

The sunday 110 is a freezeout, and the biggest guarantee of the week.

chiggypig

Bounty hunters are much lower variance, got to love that

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

Bounty hunters are much lower variance, got to love that
Posted by chiggypig

Why is that?

jordz16

if you are a losing player your money will last longer by playing BH's

Mohican

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : Why is that?
Posted by HAYSIE

Because you don't have to cash to make a profit. 

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

if you are a losing player your money will last longer by playing BH's
Posted by jordz16

Because of the bountys?

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : Because you don't have to cash to make a profit. 
Posted by Mohican

On the one I looked at, outside the top 30 that got paid, 15 players out of the remaining 258, got 3 or more heads, which just about covers the buy in.

The other 243 players made a loss unless they satted in.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

if you are a losing player your money will last longer by playing BH's
Posted by jordz16

I suppose if you took a really good player that cashed frequently, he would be better off playing freezeouts and getting double the money each time he cashed.

If you took a really bad player that didnt cash very often, then he would be better off playing bounty hunters because he would pick up the odd head now and again.

What about an average player?

Do players like bounty hunters because they are under the impression that they get more heads than they actually do?

Mohican

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : On the one I looked at, outside the top 30 that got paid, 15 players out of the remaining 258, got 3 or more heads, which just about covers the buy in. The other 243 players made a loss unless they satted in.
Posted by HAYSIE

You'd need to look at the size of the bounties to get an accurate figure as to who made a profit but even using your numbers,compared to a normal tourney,the prize pool was effectievley 50% larger. Also those who have only taken 1 or 2 heads have lessened their  losses. It effectively flattens out the pay outs.

Essexphil

Any supposed flattening of the payouts via bounties is likely to be equivalent to the flatter payout structure in freezeouts, where there is normally a higher percentage making the money.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : You'd need to look at the size of the bounties to get an accurate figure as to who made a profit but even using your numbers,compared to a normal tourney,the prize pool was effectievley 50% larger. Also those who have only taken 1 or 2 heads have lessened their  losses. It effectively flattens out the pay outs.
Posted by Mohican

Generally the players that bust early will be taking heads at the minimum price rather than heads of players that have increased their head value by busting other players. On this basis they need 3 heads to cover their buy in.

If an average player swapped over to freezeouts of the same value from bounty hunters, would they benefit from the double prize money and no head prizes?

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

Any supposed flattening of the payouts via bounties is likely to be equivalent to the flatter payout structure in freezeouts, where there is normally a higher percentage making the money.
Posted by Essexphil

You will have to explain that in English, even though I am Welsh.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : You will have to explain that in English, even though I am Welsh.
Posted by HAYSIE

Why are bounty hunters much lower variance.

FCHD

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : Why are bounty hunters much lower variance.
Posted by HAYSIE

Because in a similar sized field, the prize pool would be shared amongst a higher number of the players.

Essexphil

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : You will have to explain that in English, even though I am Welsh.
Posted by HAYSIE

In Bounty Hunters, the payout is normally to the top 10%. In Freezeouts, this is often altered on Sky to 15% approx, which has an effect similar to the bounties....

Sky__James

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

Any supposed flattening of the payouts via bounties is likely to be equivalent to the flatter payout structure in freezeouts, where there is normally a higher percentage making the money.
Posted by Essexphil

This is true although b/hunters still spread the money around a bit more.

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion? : This is true although b/hunters still spread the money around a bit more.
Posted by Sky__James

So are you saying that when promoting a particular tournament, that the head prizes have more effect than double prize money?

Phantom66

I actually prefer freezouts and personally would like to see more of them and yes generally the prize fund will be spread out further and wider. In some cases a Bounty Hunter winner can actually win MORE than they would have in a freezout, but generally if players are in the cash regularly they would be worse off than if they were playing the same field in freezouts.

HOWEVER...

Bounty Hunters are more popular than freezouts

Depositing/losing players will see their funds last longer in Bounty Hunters and so will play those over freezouts.

Just look at UKOPs, the BHs generally smash guarantee, the freezouts can struggle.

I would imagine it would be better EV for winning regs to play fields with a larger number of weaker recs in than a strong field of freezout players?

The relative strength of a field must have a greater impact on profitablity than payout structure? 

I expect Aussie could crunch some stats on profit % of winning regs in the 2 formats?

HAYSIE

In Response to Re: Are Bounty Hunters an illusion?:

I actually prefer freezouts and personally would like to see more of them and yes generally the prize fund will be spread out further and wider. In some cases a Bounty Hunter winner can actually win MORE than they would have in a freezout, but generally if players are in the cash regularly they would be worse off than if they were playing the same field in freezouts. HOWEVER... Bounty Hunters are more popular than freezouts Depositing/losing players will see their funds last longer in Bounty Hunters and so will play those over freezouts. Just look at UKOPs, the BHs generally smash guarantee, the freezouts can struggle. I would imagine it would be better EV for winning regs to play fields with a larger number of weaker recs in than a strong field of freezout players? The relative strength of a field must have a greater impact on profitablity than payout structure?  I expect Aussie could crunch some stats on profit % of winning regs in the 2 formats?
Posted by Phantom66

That would be interesting. Over to you Aussie.