You mean the dym streak week that runs once a blue moon and gets plundered by the best players on the site? Any mtt or cash player can I'm sure fit in enough sng during a week to compete for a streak week leaterboard but no micro stakes sng or cash grinder will fit in all these tournaments in every single day to have a chance of a prize here.
I know I said I would say no more but didn't expect anyone to argue my point because its clearly straight up not fair that a third regular mtt league offering free prizes is started while sng players have nothing extra to play for. It's especially bad as the sng rake is so high here in comparison to other sites.
I don't know where you get the idea that this is the third MTT league available on this site. I'm not aware of even one other running at the moment. The one that ran a few weeks ago was independent and run for charity; none of the participants were awarded any prizes that weren't donated by other players.
I'm also not sure why you think a successful participant in this league would need to play every MTT on the list. The charity leaderboard was won by someone who only scored a significant number of points two times over the course of 50 MTTs. Perhaps you should inspect the structure more closely before you jump to conclusions.
Honestly, the hypocrisy of a DYM player complaining about fairness in promotional opportunities is shocking. There are regular streak weeks and players putting in even modest volume get the benefit of generous rakeback rewards every week of the year, whereas most of the players at the stakes these tournaments run at do not benefit from that at all beyond the occasional fiver. Some might say that was unfair. But some might choose not to complain about the choices they've made in full understanding of the trade offs.
As interesting as I'm sure these complaints are to someone, they're nothing to do with us. Perhaps you should contact customer care or post a complaint elsewhere on the forum.
great idea u2 don't in why any1 wants 2 have a moan up is beyond me we all no the rake on dyms espec turbos is high but they have streak weeks which I no u did ok on this is completely different gives the real small stakes a chance of geting into a tournament they wold never buy in for
Although, currently I am not playing MTTs, barring some freerolls and a couple of 55p buyins. As I am trying to build my BR by playing DYMs. I would very much welcome this idea, for when I do start to play MTTs more regularly, especially because I am unable to participate in the two current weekly MTT comps run on the forum due to work commitments. And they seem so much fun.
I would like to share a few little thoughts that could perhaps be considered or discussed.
I totally understand the sentiment, that the hope is to cater for all types of bankrolls and players giving everyone a fair chance of winning. I wholeheartedly agree with that as I prefer promotions that give everyone a fair chance at winning.
So I was thinking, and forgive me if this was mentioned in any of the two threads about this new comp, but would a 'best scores from x number of tournaments' be a little fairer. It seems to be a common thing in promotions and competitions like this.
That way, the highest scorers won't generally be skewed in favour of players who are able and willing to play every tournament in the schedule. Maybe take the best 5, 10, 15 scores from each player to get their final score?
Another thing I quickly thought of, and it may be totally irrelevant, but generally lower buyins tend to get more entrants so that would mean it should be harder to place ITM (or at least deeper in the tournament). I am not sure if there is much difference in numbers across the schedule. But its similar to what has been mentioned previously in the thread regarding the Omaha tournament having fewer players. Perhaps some sort of tweak to the points system to allow for this. I'm not entirely sure how to do this but a possible solution would be to maybe have base points for finishing positions, like as outlined already, but get bonus points/half points/whatever per 20/50/100 entries in the MTT. Would need to work out the ideal numbers.
These are just ideas and suggestions, and could very well be flawed. I'm just sharing them, to give some initial feedback on my thoughts.
I'll sure be looking forward to participating in this comp when I can play MTTs more regularly. And I hope it turns out to be a great success.
Lastly, thank you to @NOSTRI and @waller02 for doing this, and also for the contributions from Sky for the prizes.
Ignore the moaner(s), good luck with this guys, I'm in. Will hopefully be able to play enough of these MTT's to be somewhat competitive; if you could include tonight's Orfy in the leaderboard that would be helpful.....
greg, you could organize a DYM comp and maybe sky would give that comp prizes it always seems the mtt players come up with these snazzy comps, nobody else seems to bother
We have discussed only including MTTs that make 100 runners but we won't know which MTTs they are until we have got the first week or so out of the way.
I am confident that you won't NEED to play anywhere near all of the MTTs on the list throughout the week in order to win one of the prizes, certainly with the scoring system which is a copy of the SCOOP player of the series system. You're getting 1 point for a min cash but over 50 for any ft's and 100 ftw, so all it takes is a 3 or 4 ft's and you're going to be right in the mix by the end of the week. It will be interesting to hear roughly how many of the MTTs and nights per week the first set of winners actually played.
It's going to take a couple of weeks to sort any teething problems and we can drop/add MTTs as the weeks progress.
I honestly think that @waller02 & @NOSTRI did a great job recently with the MINI UKOPS table (where there were ZERO prizes and quite a chunk raised for charity from the 'micro' players!) and so should run this how they feel fit. Perhaps some input from the players TAKING PART where necessary though.
Not planning on entering this but a few thoughts/views I have.
I think its a great idea and should be seen as fun and good for the forum. I knew the Monday games had prizes (always thought it was a good thing and good for the forum and assumed all would agree). I wasn't aware that there was prizes for the Orfordable but had a look on the forum and found a thread and found this to be the case. I don't know how many are aware this was the case based on some of the responses in this thread.
I think a promo like this is better with a fairly simple points scoring system like the one that has been suggested. This does mean that not all the MTTs that people would like to be included are included or smaller field MTTs (eg plo8) are massively favoured. If you start adjusting for field sizes I think it makes things overly complicated although it would mean @NOSTRI could have fun on excel with some formulas which he would probably love! With leagues like these, the lower buy in games will generally have larger fields but the standard will be lower so this tends to even out so I wouldn't do more points for bigger fields or for bigger buy ins.
I think the selection of MTTs is really good as it ensures loads of players have a chance and hits the target market really well. This is a bit of fun, I don't think many people are going to massively change the games they play to try and win although they may adjust schedules slightly. You can win this without playing all games or every day or the biggest buy in games which I think is important.
Personally I think the games that already have leagues/prizes shouldn't be included otherwise its double bubble for those particular games so I wouldn't include the Monday night games but I would also take out the orfordable.
@gregkdy82 Regarding the poor DYM players that don't get any benefits. If you have issues with what sky offer then why don't you start a new thread(s) and suggest something they could do in a positive manner.
I think it is really generous of sky to put on free prizes. If the prizes or potential winnings from a promo are relatively significant then players who don't normally play those games tend to get involved. Like the potential winnings from the streak promotion were significant so some people moved over. I cant see this being the case here but some players may play the odd extra game and hopefully those involved will interact on the forum a bit more, hopefully in a positive manner, which I think would be the desired outcome for sky.
Final point, anything like this wont start out perfect so suggest improvements and I am sure they will be discussed and listened to and implemented where popular. Please do realise though that you cant please everyone as has already been shown in this thread.
Excellent idea and count me in even though I only play one or two of the qualifying tournaments, and even then only rarely, it's nice to just participate. Also if you have to fill in a form and send it in I will probably forget that too!
Personally I think the PLO8 at 7.18 could be added. It gets pretty good numbers and it's inclusion may encourage some of the holdem players to give it a go, it is a vastly superior game! If it's regarded as easy points come on over and grab some!
ps apologies to @Tikay10, I may have overused the exclamation marks.........!
I think it's a great idea and just ignore the moaners but I do agree with dazzmans post where one point he mentioned was this That way, the highest scorers won't generally be skewed in favour of players who are able and willing to play every tournament in the schedule. Maybe take the best 5, 10, 15 scores from each player to get their final score?
I honestly can't see many people at all playing anywhere near every tournament on the list for 7 nights though, nor will you need to in order to have a chance of winning. I certainly won't be adding any of the £1 or 55p games to my schedule and I'm sure the same can be said for most people who register. The same can be said for the micro players who might not be playing every 5.50 on the list. We had to give a varied choice of qualifying MTTs so literally anybody could participate.
Yes statistically somebody would have a slightly better chance of winning if they played every game, every night. But the scoring system being as it is means realistically anybody can win without needing to play anywhere near every tournament.
It's an issue that's been raised a couple of times now though. Does anybody else have any thoughts to add?
I think it's a great idea and just ignore the moaners but I do agree with dazzmans post where one point he mentioned was this That way, the highest scorers won't generally be skewed in favour of players who are able and willing to play every tournament in the schedule. Maybe take the best 5, 10, 15 scores from each player to get their final score?
We've already tried to counteract this in a couple of ways.
- The eligible tournaments are split fairly evenly across buy-in levels and we don't think there are many players who would event want to play all of them. For example the kind of person playing £5.50 Bounty Hunters is probably not likely to play the £0.55 Nightly Micro - We have only used tournaments from the evening schedule, reducing the advantage full-time players and grinders will get - They all start in around a 2-hour window, making playing all of them fairly impractical. You'd end up playing around ten tournaments at once if you went for it and I think someone capable of doing that effectively is going to have their eyes on juicier tournaments at higher buy-ins. - It's also worth noting that mass multi-tabling obviously lowers your expected ROI somewhat and I doubt people doing that are going to have that much of an advantage over people concentrating on just two or three
We'll keep an eye on this though and review it if necessary.
I don't play a lot of those but I'd like to take part please! Just a minor suggestion but perhaps put in 1 of the earlier day time tournaments like a £1000 gtd 5.50 BH?
As a low level MTT player (with low level success rate too!), may I add my thanks to @waller02 and @NOSTRI for taking the time to think about and organise this. I will certainly enter though it will be more for the fun than in any expectation.
I watch the good players and read many of the insightful responses to those asking for assistance. The generous time that so many of the top players give to so many wanting to learn and improve is, I'm sure, unique to this friendly site. You have all given me food for thought in the past few weeks as we have had more time on our hands, thank you. I just need to develop greater patience (as well as basic poker skills!!)
Comments
I'm also not sure why you think a successful participant in this league would need to play every MTT on the list. The charity leaderboard was won by someone who only scored a significant number of points two times over the course of 50 MTTs. Perhaps you should inspect the structure more closely before you jump to conclusions.
Honestly, the hypocrisy of a DYM player complaining about fairness in promotional opportunities is shocking. There are regular streak weeks and players putting in even modest volume get the benefit of generous rakeback rewards every week of the year, whereas most of the players at the stakes these tournaments run at do not benefit from that at all beyond the occasional fiver. Some might say that was unfair. But some might choose not to complain about the choices they've made in full understanding of the trade offs.
As interesting as I'm sure these complaints are to someone, they're nothing to do with us. Perhaps you should contact customer care or post a complaint elsewhere on the forum.
I would like to share a few little thoughts that could perhaps be considered or discussed.
I totally understand the sentiment, that the hope is to cater for all types of bankrolls and players giving everyone a fair chance of winning. I wholeheartedly agree with that as I prefer promotions that give everyone a fair chance at winning.
So I was thinking, and forgive me if this was mentioned in any of the two threads about this new comp, but would a 'best scores from x number of tournaments' be a little fairer. It seems to be a common thing in promotions and competitions like this.
That way, the highest scorers won't generally be skewed in favour of players who are able and willing to play every tournament in the schedule. Maybe take the best 5, 10, 15 scores from each player to get their final score?
Another thing I quickly thought of, and it may be totally irrelevant, but generally lower buyins tend to get more entrants so that would mean it should be harder to place ITM (or at least deeper in the tournament). I am not sure if there is much difference in numbers across the schedule. But its similar to what has been mentioned previously in the thread regarding the Omaha tournament having fewer players. Perhaps some sort of tweak to the points system to allow for this. I'm not entirely sure how to do this but a possible solution would be to maybe have base points for finishing positions, like as outlined already, but get bonus points/half points/whatever per 20/50/100 entries in the MTT. Would need to work out the ideal numbers.
These are just ideas and suggestions, and could very well be flawed. I'm just sharing them, to give some initial feedback on my thoughts.
I'll sure be looking forward to participating in this comp when I can play MTTs more regularly. And I hope it turns out to be a great success.
Lastly, thank you to @NOSTRI and @waller02 for doing this, and also for the contributions from Sky for the prizes.
Cheers
it always seems the mtt players come up with these snazzy comps, nobody else seems to bother
I am confident that you won't NEED to play anywhere near all of the MTTs on the list throughout the week in order to win one of the prizes, certainly with the scoring system which is a copy of the SCOOP player of the series system. You're getting 1 point for a min cash but over 50 for any ft's and 100 ftw, so all it takes is a 3 or 4 ft's and you're going to be right in the mix by the end of the week. It will be interesting to hear roughly how many of the MTTs and nights per week the first set of winners actually played.
It's going to take a couple of weeks to sort any teething problems and we can drop/add MTTs as the weeks progress.
So you queue up and when you get to the front, you turn the 2nd pasty down in disgust because last week Kwikfit were doing half price MOTs.
I honestly think that @waller02 & @NOSTRI did a great job recently with the MINI UKOPS table (where there were ZERO prizes and quite a chunk raised for charity from the 'micro' players!) and so should run this how they feel fit. Perhaps some input from the players TAKING PART where necessary though.
Good Luck. Cheers.
I think its a great idea and should be seen as fun and good for the forum. I knew the Monday games had prizes (always thought it was a good thing and good for the forum and assumed all would agree). I wasn't aware that there was prizes for the Orfordable but had a look on the forum and found a thread and found this to be the case. I don't know how many are aware this was the case based on some of the responses in this thread.
I think a promo like this is better with a fairly simple points scoring system like the one that has been suggested. This does mean that not all the MTTs that people would like to be included are included or smaller field MTTs (eg plo8) are massively favoured. If you start adjusting for field sizes I think it makes things overly complicated although it would mean @NOSTRI could have fun on excel with some formulas which he would probably love! With leagues like these, the lower buy in games will generally have larger fields but the standard will be lower so this tends to even out so I wouldn't do more points for bigger fields or for bigger buy ins.
I think the selection of MTTs is really good as it ensures loads of players have a chance and hits the target market really well. This is a bit of fun, I don't think many people are going to massively change the games they play to try and win although they may adjust schedules slightly. You can win this without playing all games or every day or the biggest buy in games which I think is important.
Personally I think the games that already have leagues/prizes shouldn't be included otherwise its double bubble for those particular games so I wouldn't include the Monday night games but I would also take out the orfordable.
@gregkdy82 Regarding the poor DYM players that don't get any benefits. If you have issues with what sky offer then why don't you start a new thread(s) and suggest something they could do in a positive manner.
I think it is really generous of sky to put on free prizes. If the prizes or potential winnings from a promo are relatively significant then players who don't normally play those games tend to get involved. Like the potential winnings from the streak promotion were significant so some people moved over. I cant see this being the case here but some players may play the odd extra game and hopefully those involved will interact on the forum a bit more, hopefully in a positive manner, which I think would be the desired outcome for sky.
Final point, anything like this wont start out perfect so suggest improvements and I am sure they will be discussed and listened to and implemented where popular. Please do realise though that you cant please everyone as has already been shown in this thread.
Best of luck to all that enter.
Personally I think the PLO8 at 7.18 could be added. It gets pretty good numbers and it's inclusion may encourage some of the holdem players to give it a go, it is a vastly superior game! If it's regarded as easy points come on over and grab some!
ps apologies to @Tikay10, I may have overused the exclamation marks.........!
Yes statistically somebody would have a slightly better chance of winning if they played every game, every night. But the scoring system being as it is means realistically anybody can win without needing to play anywhere near every tournament.
It's an issue that's been raised a couple of times now though. Does anybody else have any thoughts to add?
- The eligible tournaments are split fairly evenly across buy-in levels and we don't think there are many players who would event want to play all of them. For example the kind of person playing £5.50 Bounty Hunters is probably not likely to play the £0.55 Nightly Micro
- We have only used tournaments from the evening schedule, reducing the advantage full-time players and grinders will get
- They all start in around a 2-hour window, making playing all of them fairly impractical. You'd end up playing around ten tournaments at once if you went for it and I think someone capable of doing that effectively is going to have their eyes on juicier tournaments at higher buy-ins.
- It's also worth noting that mass multi-tabling obviously lowers your expected ROI somewhat and I doubt people doing that are going to have that much of an advantage over people concentrating on just two or three
We'll keep an eye on this though and review it if necessary.
I watch the good players and read many of the insightful responses to those asking for assistance. The generous time that so many of the top players give to so many wanting to learn and improve is, I'm sure, unique to this friendly site. You have all given me food for thought in the past few weeks as we have had more time on our hands, thank you. I just need to develop greater patience (as well as basic poker skills!!)
Thanks again.