You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Mini Major ........HELP ?
I've just posted this on the Results Who Won What thread ......but I think it would be good to get some ideas from players, so thought I'll start a discussion on it
I know this is sticking my head above the Parapet, but I do think the Prize Structure needs looking at in the Mini Major.
Do you need to pay 1 in 5.5 entries ?
Could a little bit be trimmed off the Top 2 places ?
I know it's a nice Tourney to play, and defo needs help as we don't have enough 'Freezies', but when you have to finish in the Top 9 to make more than a 10 minute £11 TDYM, it does seem a bit silly imo.
What do other players think ? .......whilst I'm looking for my 'Tin Hat'
I know this is sticking my head above the Parapet, but I do think the Prize Structure needs looking at in the Mini Major.
Do you need to pay 1 in 5.5 entries ?
Could a little bit be trimmed off the Top 2 places ?
I know it's a nice Tourney to play, and defo needs help as we don't have enough 'Freezies', but when you have to finish in the Top 9 to make more than a 10 minute £11 TDYM, it does seem a bit silly imo.
What do other players think ? .......whilst I'm looking for my 'Tin Hat'
Comments
surely most ppl are playing the mini for the fun and the whole challenge of surviving, if the only reason you are playing is simply to win money then maybe you should stick to purely cash games.
Firstly, let's look at the actual pay out structure:-
138 entries
1 £412.50 2 £240 3 £136.50 4 £106.50
5 £91.50 6. £76.50 7 £58.50 8 £37.50
9 £27 10-15 £21 16-20 £19.50 21-25 £18
Freezeouts pay out a higher percentage than bounty hunters. Fair enough.
But the Mini is one of the few MTTs on Sky that are single entry. Most others are re-entry. And the re-entries are ignored on percentage for pay outs. So-while a Bounty Hunter might pay out on 15% of unique entries, it often pays out to less than 10% of total entries. So-to give a Bounty equivalent for 138 total entries, pay out would be only the top 12 or 15.
As well as paying out to 25 runners, the initial pay jumps are (IMO) too low. £18 for 25th. £21 for 10th. Less than double your stake-for 10th out of 138. And a late night. For £10.
Paying the top 20 would free up £90. And enable the prizes for 8-20 to be higher.
And-while I agree with a lot of things @green_beer says, I think most people play the Mini to try and win money. Just as much as cash games.
The deal facility would be good. But it's beyond the capabilities of the software
There were 136 entries. But only 20 places were paid. Because it was based on the 115 unique entries, ignoring the 21 re-entries.
I am not advocating re-entries for the Mini. I just think the pay out percentage should be reduced taking it into account.
I just think that paying less places would not be popular.
It would just mean cashing less often, but for a little more money.
Whereas allowing re-entries may accomplish the best of both worlds.
Still paying 25 places, and increasing the prize money a little.
If you consider the mains.
Sky have been able to maintain the guarantees since the advent of re-entries.
This is only because of the re-entries.
There are 30 plus every day, not including the Friday rebuy, and Sunday Major.
I havent any stats but if you took out the re-entries, then I think that just about every main would miss its guarantee, including the Major.
Falling guarantees is a vicious circle, and prompts players to look elsewhere.
So whatever you think of re-entries, they do serve a purpose.
I think you could easily generate an extra £90 by allowing re-entries, probably far more, and have no need to reduce the number of places that were paid.
Why havent they already done it?
IMHO the games that are mainly for the Regs should allow re-entries, and the ones that are mainly for the Recs should not.
I look upon the Sunday Mini as the Rec "Major" just like the Sunday Major is the "Reg" one.
And I don't want the Recs to have to face the top players buying in again after they have been knocked out in the Sunday (or any) Mini.
I am not sure the average rec would see it the same way as you do.
Many may just view it as an opportunity for them to continue playing after being knocked out, and a means of increasing the prize money.
Although I dont have any stats on recs, or regs, and cant argue with any certainty.
There would still be the self-same "overlay" (although it is technically not an overlay at all-entry fees were over the £1500-Sky just earned less profit).
If you want a more radical suggestion, how about this:-
It is clear that Sky (unlike every other site) does not wish to charge rake on a re-entry.
How about for the Sunday Major (and only the Sunday Major) any re-entry is charged £110, so including the same rake that first-time entrants pay, and the total rake from re-entries added to the Sunday Mini prize pool the next week?
Surely it would be beneficial for each tourney to have a stand alone format.
Before popping out for a bit of lunch, I had the same thought about the rake on re-entries.
Although this was because I thought that the FT bonus might have been an issue.
Allowing re-entries on the minis may have increased the number of FT bonuses being won.
Definitely not a bad thing.
If this was the case, then maybe the rake on all rebuys would cover this.
Any surplus could be used to produce some sort of bonus on one or more of the tourneys.
So I would suggest charging the rake on all mains and minis.
This would create a welcome change, and a boost to all the mini prize pools.
The question I would ask is why not?
Who would be against bigger prize pools?
Re-entries are optional.
My view is that you can overthink it.
Or if this is too difficult then perhaps a decent bonus for the top three players based on the most cashes in a week/month, and a bigger one for the top 3 based on the most final tables in the week, or month.
This would probably boost the number of entries, and definitely boost prize pools.
I am saying this because the current FT bonus is only applicable to those playing the main, and the mini, and therefore is not open to the smaller stakes players, and recs.
I know its not a BH, but what about a head prize on @Tikay10, or Neil Channing?
You get the prize for knocking them out before 10pm.
If its not won, it gets carried forward, to the following week
You could then fund it out of the rake on re-entries.
Lets say 30 per week.
When it reached say £150, you could take the 10pm limit off to ensure it was won.
If you allowed re-entries to all minis, and used all the rakes from re-entries to fund this, it would make it far more interesting.
This would produce maybe £100 per week, based on 30 per night, excluding Friday.
You could then stop it at £500.
On second thoughts, its probably best to take @Tikay10 out of the equation, if you were looking for big pay outs, rather than a small one every week.
If you were looking for another boost you could introduce a qualifying criteria of having to play say 2 other minis during the week.
So to qualify on Sunday, it would be your third mini of the week.
This would give entries a boost throughout the week, as would all the re-entries, and improve all the minis, which would obviously increase the prize pools without paying less places.
It would also be a bit of fun.
Ha, excellent dig there @HAYSIE, well played.
In fact, on the rare occasion I get past the bubble it's a case of shoving and calling really light because there's no incentive to play even remotely optimally until the last 10 or so.
So I'm probably in the less places, better payouts camp.
Re-entries are obviously optional.
Last night in the main there were 45 re-entries from 153 runners.
So it made the prize pool £5,940, from £4,590.
What would the prize money have been like without the re-entries?
I am obviously not doing a very good job of selling it.
Thats what poker should be all about, not winning an extra 10r!
Reaching a final table, then making it to the final three, and eventually landing heads-up with the luck on your side, being dealt AA as the villain shoves their ATo — BANG — a first-place victory, out of a field of 400 players.
That feeling is untouchable, the boy who wins the wsop feels exactly like that in those initial moments, the money doesn't matter as much as the pride, happiness, and boost of confidence that a first-place win provides. obviously the cash is still important.....
When the payout includes more players, it safeguards more people's bankrolls. I believe this is a healthy approach. Many micro players are operating on shallow bankrolls. By ensuring that more of them get a share of the winnings, it keeps them coming back for more, providing another chance to experience that ultimate rush by grinding all the way to the end.
Individuals with substantial bankrolls or those who consistently win may forget what it's like for the 'little guys' who still have dreams. That's why earning back your initial investment is satisfying, as it keeps your dream alive for another day.
What a great post that is by @green_beer