I wonder if @Tikay10 could speak to the suits and have a MicroMasters tab added to the tourney section, and then all the tourneys that are part of this could be easily visible?
If it's a lot of work, of course no need to do it.
Nice idea, but all things considered, that's not something they would be prepared to do. The Micro Masters has - at a guess - 40 or so entrants, but every evening thousands of uniques play MTT's on Sky Poker, so in the greater scheme of things it's small beer. Certainly not to those who play it though.
46 now, actually. Does that change anything?
Hi @NOSTRI & @waller02 , I have found myself checking which tournaments qualify each evening (so as not to make the same mistake as Jackdaw(!!!). I also like to see who on my table might be in the league. Would it be too much trouble to re-list the tournies and the entrants each Monday, perhaps as the starting post on page one?
Let's talk schedule changes. We haven't responded to all the feedback on this but we have been paying attention.
Here's a chart of how everything is doing with entries from you lot.
The only obvious weak performers here are the £300 Rebuy and the £100 Rebuy. It's not too surprising; the £300 RB has a very unforgiving, high variance format, and the £100 RB is rather late. Both get fairly low numbers overall, too. So we're going to give the £100 RB the boot. The £300 RB has one more week to save its life. If it gets more entries next week than this week, we'll keep it, otherwise it's gone.
There has been some discussion about adding a PLO tournament to the schedule. Since the forum now has a dedicated PLO league with some prizes, we're putting the kibosh on that. You can get involved with that HERE if you'd like.
And we are going to add the following tournaments to the schedule.
1715: £100 Rebuy (£1.10)
1805: £200 Bounty Hunter (£2.20)
2015: £500 Deep Stack (£5.50) (Saturday & Sunday)
2115: £300 Deep Stack (£2.20)
The 2115 and 2015 Deep Stacks both got a few requests and seem like uncontroversial additions. We've added the 1805 BH, which also got a few requests, to provide another cheap seat. And we're going to give an earlier £100 RB a go too, partly to balance out the schedule's buy-in levels and see if it does better than the later one.
This is all effective from Monday. Everything stays the same tonight.
Discuss amongst yourselves. I'll be over here with earmuffs on going "la la la la la."
I wonder if @Tikay10 could speak to the suits and have a MicroMasters tab added to the tourney section, and then all the tourneys that are part of this could be easily visible?
If it's a lot of work, of course no need to do it.
Nice idea, but all things considered, that's not something they would be prepared to do. The Micro Masters has - at a guess - 40 or so entrants, but every evening thousands of uniques play MTT's on Sky Poker, so in the greater scheme of things it's small beer. Certainly not to those who play it though.
46 now, actually. Does that change anything?
Hi @NOSTRI & @waller02 , I have found myself checking which tournaments qualify each evening (so as not to make the same mistake as Jackdaw(!!!). I also like to see who on my table might be in the league. Would it be too much trouble to re-list the tournies and the entrants each Monday, perhaps as the starting post on page one?
The eligible tournaments will be kept up to date in the first post of this thread and will get updated on Monday. I can also post them each Monday if you like, but the first post is the easiest place to find that information.
I'll pop a full list of entrants in that post too.
Loving your work guys, first thread I look at when I log in. With regards the discussion re. weighted points awarding, have you considered 1point per entrant in each tournament. ie, in say a mini with 600 runners winner gets 600 points, 2nd gets 599 etc etc and 600th gets 1 point, while in a 100 runner tournament 1st gets 100 points and so on. Just a thought. Keep up the good work.
Great write ups @NOSTRI. From next week will you have data on who’s scoring the most points per tourney? Thought that might be a difficult stat to publish as we’re only entering results for tournies we’ve actually cashed in.
As for scheduling changes kicking those 2 and adding the suggested ones is good, as well as @MynaFrett’s suggestion of the 5:30 BH.
I do understand @misterpj’s point that final tabling a mini main is more impressive than a 100 runner thing. But creating a weighted points system seems rough work that could just confuse the system that’s already working well. Different people will win it every week so sometimes you’ll benefit from running well in the smaller field games, sometimes someone else will
With regard to the points system, I agree with this.
We are all on a level playing field and will all have nights/weeks where we score heavily in the smaller fields. Yes winning the mini only gets 100 points, the same as a tournament with a lot less runners, but I'm sure the money you earn for taking it down will soften that blow.
Loving your work guys, first thread I look at when I log in. With regards the discussion re. weighted points awarding, have you considered 1point per entrant in each tournament. ie, in say a mini with 600 runners winner gets 600 points, 2nd gets 599 etc etc and 600th gets 1 point, while in a 100 runner tournament 1st gets 100 points and so on. Just a thought. Keep up the good work.
Part of the reason I'm hesitant to dig into this is because I'm far from a math whizz but a similar way of doing it to this is probably what I'd do. I like the points distribution as it is currently--what you describe gives no bonus to final table results, for instance--but it could be multiplied by the number of runners.
So if it got 1,000 runners (I believe this is the cap on Sky), you would get the full 100 points for first. But if it only got 100 runners, it would be multiplied by 0.10 (100/1000) and you would only get 10 points.
This would be a quite simple way to implement weighted scoring. But I'm not sure if it doesn't just overcomplicate matters for relatively little gain. Plus it's still imperfect. The £300 RB gets few runners, but I'd say the average skill level skews higher there due to its structure and it's also much higher variance, so it still isn't necessarily that much easier to win than, say, a Deep Stack with twice the number of runners. So if it were to be truly fair it would need to factor in blind levels and rebuys too. In a perfect world we'd also be giving points bonuses for bounties.
On balance it seems better to just not overcomplicate matters.
I personally dont agree in not including the Sunday Mini. Yes it is a £11 buy in (Freezeout)...but players will spend more than that in some rebuy games including the Friday night Mini rebuy.
Apart from that, this whole thing is a stupid idea, run by stupid people, with poker being a stupid game, played by stupid players.*
See you next week guys....keep up the good work, cheers.
Loving your work guys, first thread I look at when I log in. With regards the discussion re. weighted points awarding, have you considered 1point per entrant in each tournament. ie, in say a mini with 600 runners winner gets 600 points, 2nd gets 599 etc etc and 600th gets 1 point, while in a 100 runner tournament 1st gets 100 points and so on. Just a thought. Keep up the good work.
Part of the reason I'm hesitant to dig into this is because I'm far from a math whizz but a similar way of doing it to this is probably what I'd do. I like the points distribution as it is currently--what you describe gives no bonus to final table results, for instance--but it could be multiplied by the number of runners.
So if it got 1,000 runners (I believe this is the cap on Sky), you would get the full 100 points for first. But if it only got 100 runners, it would be multiplied by 0.10 (100/1000) and you would only get 10 points.
This would be a quite simple way to implement weighted scoring. But I'm not sure if it doesn't just overcomplicate matters for relatively little gain. Plus it's still imperfect. The £300 RB gets few runners, but I'd say the average skill level skews higher there due to its structure and it's also much higher variance, so it still isn't necessarily that much easier to win than, say, a Deep Stack with twice the number of runners. So if it were to be truly fair it would need to factor in blind levels and rebuys too. In a perfect world we'd also be giving points bonuses for bounties.
On balance it seems better to just not overcomplicate matters.
For what it is worth, totally agree. This has been a fun week (well until my Aces just got crushed by quad kings lol) but seriously, my vote is keep it as it is. If I have understood this concept correctly, the idea was to give micro/low players a chance of getting a ticket into a top game whilst having some fun along the way. The banter has been good, the league table is going to the wire and everyone seems to have enjoyed it at the level and type of tournaments at which they are most comfortable. If this became weighted, then, imho, it loses its identity. The best players will (or should) still prevail in the league regardless.
I personally dont agree in not including the Sunday Mini. Yes it is a £11 buy in (Freezeout)...but players will spend more than that in some rebuy games including the Friday night Mini rebuy.
The whole point of this is to be inclusive of people with small bankrolls or who prefer to play low stakes and miss out on many promos here. Putting an £11 buy-in on the schedule does not serve that goal. We made a point of not including too many rebuys (the £5.50 RB BH will never be on the schedule) for the same reason.
Of course it is possible one could spend that much in the Mini Avenger, but nobody has to. That particular tournament was easily the least-played Mini Main of the week, which I believe suggests it should also be excluded. I don't think many people on this leaderboard are spending £11 on a tournament very often and this competition shouldn't ask them to.
I personally dont agree in not including the Sunday Mini. Yes it is a £11 buy in (Freezeout)...but players will spend more than that in some rebuy games including the Friday night Mini rebuy.
Apart from that, this whole thing is a stupid idea, run by stupid people, with poker being a stupid game, played by stupid players.*
See you next week guys....keep up the good work, cheers.
*just bust out the micro with AA v 56.
My AA got busted by quad Kinds in the same event lol
Not really on topic, but your current leader, @Kahuna96 aka Mr Kahuna Burger has been top 3 or thereabouts in tonight's Sunday Major most of the evening. Very long way to go yet, but GL him.
Comments
I'll pop a full list of entrants in that post too.
With regards the discussion re. weighted points awarding, have you considered 1point per entrant in each tournament. ie, in say a mini with 600 runners winner gets 600 points, 2nd gets 599 etc etc and 600th gets 1 point, while in a 100 runner tournament 1st gets 100 points and so on.
Just a thought.
Keep up the good work.
We are all on a level playing field and will all have nights/weeks where we score heavily in the smaller fields. Yes winning the mini only gets 100 points, the same as a tournament with a lot less runners, but I'm sure the money you earn for taking it down will soften that blow.
So if it got 1,000 runners (I believe this is the cap on Sky), you would get the full 100 points for first. But if it only got 100 runners, it would be multiplied by 0.10 (100/1000) and you would only get 10 points.
This would be a quite simple way to implement weighted scoring. But I'm not sure if it doesn't just overcomplicate matters for relatively little gain. Plus it's still imperfect. The £300 RB gets few runners, but I'd say the average skill level skews higher there due to its structure and it's also much higher variance, so it still isn't necessarily that much easier to win than, say, a Deep Stack with twice the number of runners. So if it were to be truly fair it would need to factor in blind levels and rebuys too. In a perfect world we'd also be giving points bonuses for bounties.
On balance it seems better to just not overcomplicate matters.
Is this £11 event included tonight ?
Not according to the list on the first page.
Sometimes, ill ask a question I know the answer too just for the benefit of the timid people who dont like to ask.
Apart from that, this whole thing is a stupid idea, run by stupid people, with poker being a stupid game, played by stupid players.*
See you next week guys....keep up the good work, cheers.
*just bust out the micro with AA v 56.
Of course it is possible one could spend that much in the Mini Avenger, but nobody has to. That particular tournament was easily the least-played Mini Main of the week, which I believe suggests it should also be excluded. I don't think many people on this leaderboard are spending £11 on a tournament very often and this competition shouldn't ask them to.
Not really on topic, but your current leader, @Kahuna96 aka Mr Kahuna Burger has been top 3 or thereabouts in tonight's Sunday Major most of the evening. Very long way to go yet, but GL him.