IMO the difference between 1/5 and 1/10 is mainly going to be psychological, the 1/5 just seems way more achievable. also most sats on Sky are usually 1/5 so therefore people are more used to the skills/theory behind them then the 1/10. the numbers clearly show that there is little difference, but a lot of poker players don't think in that way, hence why the 1/5 looks a way more attractive option. Posted by scotty77
I do largely agree with Ryan in that it is mostly (but not entirely) in people's heads BUT... that does make a physical impact when it is in everyone's heads so a large amount of people choose not to play them (or not play them as often as they would normally) which reduces how many runners they get and makes them tougher if there's only 1 seat going.
Also, I see Mohican's point that winning 3 x 1in5s in worst odds than winning a 1in5 and then a 1in10, but this isn't necessarily the route everyone will choose to take....
I.E. 1in5 X 1in10 gives you odds of 1in50 (assuming no edge etc).
But in the other structure I would probably choose to join at the quarters so have to win 2 X 1in5s which is 1in25
Yes instead of costing £8, it will probably cost in the region of £14 but I'd happily pay the extra bit to have much more realistic odds to beat.
EDIT: Yes as Solack said, they don't play like satellites when you have 1 seat or maybe 2 with between 11-29 runners
I do largely agree with Ryan in that it is mostly (but not entirely) in people's heads BUT... that does make a physical impact when it is in everyone's heads so a large amount of people choose not to play them (or not play them as often as they would normally) which reduces how many runners they get and makes them tougher if there's only 1 seat going. Also, I see Mohican's point that winning 3 x 1in5s in worst odds than winning a 1in5 and then a 1in10, but this isn't necessarily the route everyone will choose to take.... I.E. 1in5 X 1in10 gives you odds of 1in50 (assuming no edge etc). But in the other structure I would probably choose to join at the quarters so have to win 2 X 1in5s which is 1in25 Yes instead of costing £8, it will probably cost in the region of £14 but I'd happily pay the extra bit to have much more realistic odds to beat. EDIT: Yes as Solack said, they don't play like satellites when you have 1 seat or maybe 2 with between 11-29 runners Posted by Lambert180
Well I will if I can, but I had a job and work 9-5 Monday-Friday so if they only run in the daytime, then I can't. But even if that's the case, I'd rather pay a bit more for the quarter, knowing the Semi is 1in5
Well I will if I can, but I had a job and work 9-5 Monday-Friday so if they only run in the daytime, then I can't. But even if that's the case, I'd rather pay a bit more for the quarter, knowing the Semi is 1in5 Posted by Lambert180
Those last three Posts by Pommy, Geldy, & Darty..... I thought they were particularly interesting, & well worth some thought, so I sent them upstairs this morning. I got a snap reply, too, which said this was something they have looked at already, & are considering implementing soon . Read into that what you will. Posted by Tikay10
Comments
Also, I see Mohican's point that winning 3 x 1in5s in worst odds than winning a 1in5 and then a 1in10, but this isn't necessarily the route everyone will choose to take....
I.E. 1in5 X 1in10 gives you odds of 1in50 (assuming no edge etc).
But in the other structure I would probably choose to join at the quarters so have to win 2 X 1in5s which is 1in25
Yes instead of costing £8, it will probably cost in the region of £14 but I'd happily pay the extra bit to have much more realistic odds to beat.
EDIT: Yes as Solack said, they don't play like satellites when you have 1 seat or maybe 2 with between 11-29 runners
TY Sir.