Right as discussed on mine and DTW's Table in the current deepie, im suggesting that the way the winner is chosen should be changed and we would like all your thoughts, heres mine:
Best 3 tourney scores, by scores this should be done by average amount of field beaten eg. 25/100, 25/100, 25/100 = 75% of field beat would be the average for this person
alternatively we could also do highest casher? personally i prefer the average as rewards consistent performers
I see whats going on, a "newbie" wins so lets change the format quick. LOL
Does the "number of players" beat" actually change anything? I just had a look at the top 3 from last night and I reckon it ends up the same, is it not just looking at the same result from the other end ,so to speak?
Anyway, i will happily play more of these no matter what format, great night.
In Response to Re: Last Longer Comp Monday 20th Dec - Steveskin1 Wins £5-50 Take on Tikay Entry for Friday : Hi Steve sent you a pm Posted by DTWBANDIT
There is a difference, and it's probably fairer, but unless it's really close, you would probably get the same result both ways.
"Money won" would be the best way, as that's the aim of tourny poker, but that would probably make it a 4 horse race between the 4 winners of the 4 specified tournys, so it wouldn't be as much fun for everyone.
I see whats going on, a "newbie" wins so lets change the format quick. LOL Does the "number of players" beat" actually change anything? I just had a look at the top 3 from last night and I reckon it ends up the same, is it not just looking at the same result from the other end ,so to speak? Anyway, i will happily play more of these no matter what format, great night. Posted by steveskin1
Firstly, congratulations on your win last night - great performance.
The difference between finishing position and "players beat" is whether you favour the people who do well in the events with larger fields or not. If everyone played all four events it wouldn't make a difference but if some people only play three it can be siginificant depending on how different the field sizes are. Last night one event had 97 runners and another had 149 runners.
Percentage of field beaten smoothes the results out irrespective of field size but is a bit harder for some people to understand.
If amount of prize money were used, it wouldn't be a "last longer" competition. Also the competion would just reward the person who had already won the most.
As DOHHHHHHH said, running it on similar lines to last night's event adds some tension to it since more people are generally "in the mix" to win.
They are all equally easy to administer so it's not a problem on what people decide upon.
I see the point of the "players beat" now, I was ignoring the fact that some only play 3 events. Whatever is decided to be fairest I will be there next week lol.
In Response to Re: Last Longer Comp Monday 20th Dec - Steveskin1 Wins £5-50 Take on Tikay Entry for Friday : Firstly, congratulations on your win last night - great performance. The difference between finishing position and "players beat" is whether you favour the people who do well in the events with larger fields or not. If everyone played all four events it wouldn't make a difference but if some people only play three it can be siginificant depending on how different the field sizes are. Last night one event had 97 runners and another had 149 runners. Percentage of field beaten smoothes the results out irrespective of field size but is a bit harder for some people to understand. If amount of prize money were used, it wouldn't be a " last longer " competition. Also the competion would just reward the person who had already won the most. As DOHHHHHHH said, running it on similar lines to last night's event adds some tension to it since more people are generally "in the mix" to win. They are all equally easy to administer so it's not a problem on what people decide upon. Posted by MereNovice
Hi Merenovice have sent you a pm about this m8y Michael
Comments
Thank you to both merekat & DTW for organising this and spreadsheets
+1 great job Squawkers, i was also refreshing as often as possible usually every 5 great updates as ever
Im definately down for another one, im going to post again as i think it was missed what i discussed with DTW.....
Great night
John
Right as discussed on mine and DTW's Table in the current deepie, im suggesting that the way the winner is chosen should be changed and we would like all your thoughts, heres mine:
Best 3 tourney scores, by scores this should be done by average amount of field beaten
eg. 25/100, 25/100, 25/100 = 75% of field beat would be the average for this person
alternatively we could also do highest casher? personally i prefer the average as rewards consistent performers
YOUR THOUGHTS PLEASE......
Good call
Does the "number of players" beat" actually change anything?
I just had a look at the top 3 from last night and I reckon it ends up the same, is it not just looking at the same result from the other end ,so to speak?
Anyway, i will happily play more of these no matter what format, great night.
much appreciated
The difference between finishing position and "players beat" is whether you favour the people who do well in the events with larger fields or not.
If everyone played all four events it wouldn't make a difference but if some people only play three it can be siginificant depending on how different the field sizes are.
Last night one event had 97 runners and another had 149 runners.
Percentage of field beaten smoothes the results out irrespective of field size but is a bit harder for some people to understand.
If amount of prize money were used, it wouldn't be a "last longer" competition. Also the competion would just reward the person who had already won the most.
As DOHHHHHHH said, running it on similar lines to last night's event adds some tension to it since more people are generally "in the mix" to win.
They are all equally easy to administer so it's not a problem on what people decide upon.
Whatever is decided to be fairest I will be there next week lol.
Hi Merenovice have sent you a pm about this m8y
Michael