Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /

Pay structure

View Poll Results: I'd rather play 180's where..
the top 9 get paid. Hard to get there, but big ROI if you do. 0 0%
the top 12 get paid. Tricky, but still a good return for making it. 1 3.57%
the top 18 get paid. As it was. 6 21.43%
the top 27 get piad. The new format. 20 71.43%
the top 90 get paid. Lets give everyone a chance! 1 3.57%
Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

Old
Default
Pay structure - Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:47 AM
(#1)
steveisnot's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 467
In light of the changes to the pay structure in the 90 and 180 SNG's I thought I put a poll up to see what people think.

For me this change is going the wrong way http://www.pokerschoolonline.com/for...d=1#post393486

Using the 180's What do you think?
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 11:47 AM
(#2)
TOO2COO's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,882
(Super-Moderator)
Hiya Steve,

Speaking for my self I would like the 27 spots over 18 in the 180s and this why:

the casual player who finishes in the top 27 more then they do the top 18 will not lose interested in these games as they not making the top 18 to often but making it the top 27 they may min cash more and in return this keeping them returning to playing these games as they happy to min cash …..

I think we will see going forward over time a lot less of the 10% payouts with a move to more 15% and 20% payouts and think this will become the stander in the online poker industry.

Any way just my opinion

Thanks for being part of PSO, and Best of Luck at the Tables

T2C


Super-Moderator

7 Time Bracelet Winner



 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:41 PM
(#3)
Ovalman's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,778
There's nothing more demoralising playing 20+ games in a row and failing to cash and that's from me a winning player. I've had a few spells recently where I lost 20+ games, what must it be like to someone who deposits every week and wants to play a few games 1 table at a time?

The flatter the structure the better imo.

Even with these flat payouts, most of the money is in those top 3 places. If you play any game you should be aiming for a top 3 spot.

Let the players like above pay your way in this game, let them limp to the cash while you aim for the win.


Bracelet Winner
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 12:57 PM
(#4)
ForrestFive's Avatar
Since: May 2011
Posts: 2,036
I checked the old top pay-outs and they seem the same - I made 2nd for $148 before.

Remembering how tough it can be and time consuming to bubble before the last 2 tables - I voted for the new format.

 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:29 PM
(#5)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,802
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
I try to play 20% payout tourneys whenever possible, if I can't find one of those at the game I'm looking into, I'll go with a 15%. I avoid the 10% ones whenever possible.

John (JWK24)


Super-Moderator



6 Time Bracelet Winner


 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 02:48 PM
(#6)
effsea's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,609
I need all the help I can get.......hiccup,

The higher the pay out the better,

Because I think l'm a better player than I really am..............hiccup..lol

cheers all
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:37 PM
(#7)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveisnot View Post
In light of the changes to the pay structure in the 90 and 180 SNG's I thought I put a poll up to see what people think.

For me this change is going the wrong way http://www.pokerschoolonline.com/for...d=1#post393486

Using the 180's What do you think?

Good poll topic Steve.

Dude,I'm with you,this change,me no likey. I voted for the structure to remain the same.

The 90 man's...meh,onkly 1 spot added,very slight haircut on some of the lower paying (4-12) spots to do so,no biggie.

The 180 man's...BIG change. The top 3 should always be the goal of such a game,but in all SNG structures there is (or at least WAS) enough of a reward for min-cashing to make doing so a credible,and indeed sensible,first priority.

To give the lower paying spots in the 180 man's,especially the 10-18 spots,a sizeable haircut to fund what has now supplanted the number 7 spot in a 45 man as the single most useless cash "prize" in a multi-table SNG,the 19-27 spot in the new 180 man structure,weakens the attraction of these games greatly IMO.

John Nance Garner once described the usefulness of being the Vice President of the US (he was from 1933-1941)as being "not worth a warm bucket of spit", (he actually used a different bodily fluid in his descripton,but I'll stick with the more polite version).

I feel the 19-27 level payout that's been added to the 180 man's would need to be goven more credit than they are due to be equated with a "warm bucket of spit" myself.





Quote:
Originally Posted by TOO2COO View Post
Hiya Steve,

Speaking for my self I would like the 27 spots over 18 in the 180s and this why:

the casual player who finishes in the top 27 more then they do the top 18 will not lose interested in these games as they not making the top 18 to often but making it the top 27 they may min cash more and in return this keeping them returning to playing these games as they happy to min cash …..

I think we will see going forward over time a lot less of the 10% payouts with a move to more 15% and 20% payouts and think this will become the stander in the online poker industry.

Any way just my opinion

Thanks for being part of PSO, and Best of Luck at the Tables

T2C

Hey Brian.


I saw where Pokerstars Baard made the same argument about noobs feeling better about continuing to play these were it easier for them to get any kind of a cash in the thread steveo linked.

OK,that has some validity as a reason I guess. I'm going to have to disagree with the reasoning behind this train of thought. I just don't get where someone playing in a 180 man for a couple hours or more (depending on structure) is going to feel so good about the "accomplishment" of limping over the finish line to the 19-27 level and winning roughly a 6% profit ($2.66 for a $0.16 profit in the $2.50 game for example),that it would even approach the letdown feelings one will have when they fail to cash.

On your prediction that the site will be moving to a more uniform standard of 15% to 20% payouts for most,or all,multi-table SNG's and freeze out MTT's...man I seriously hope that you're wrong on this. Would be a huge letdown IMO.

Not to say there's no place for such structures,there is. But variety is a good thing and there should be 10-13% structures,15% and even 20%. All are fine,I would push for more 15% and less myself,as the 15%+ structures should be for the lower level games.

That's where I am on this.





Quote:
Originally Posted by JWK24 View Post
I try to play 20% payout tourneys whenever possible, if I can't find one of those at the game I'm looking into, I'll go with a 15%. I avoid the 10% ones whenever possible.

John (JWK24)

John,you know I think you're a damn good player. But when you and I talk on the tables or on Skype,what do you ALWAYS say was your biggest regret in our first go round here as US players and is the leak you will most aggressively plug when we get back on here?

Your min-cashing too much in multi-table game formats.

Hell,NO ONE on this site could match your ITM % on your tracked games on OPR. I've NEVER seen another player play that many games (almost 800...) and have an ITM % of 51%. Nothing even close.

And as incredible a number as that is...you were underwater,slightly,in the same tracked games vis-a-vis your ROI.

Obvious flaw,obvious fix. And you saw and see that.

Given your flaw for being too content to tuck in and take a min-cash,why would you want them to make that crutch bigger?

You're way too good a player to EVER want the higher payout levels to be compromised to fund levels that are far beneath what a player with your skills should be concerned with.

And that,for myself,is where I really come out on this...to fund this new 19-27 level they're taking money out of MY pocket,when I'm pushing for the bigger prizes. Maybe not the top 3 so much,but the value of slots 4-18 have definitely taken a serious hit.

Thumbs down on this change IMO.
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:58 PM
(#8)
TrustySam's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,291
BronzeStar
Well I don't play these, but I voted for 18 just to show steveisnot some support

Mostly I just wanted to add that back when I was playing STTs I signed up at another site so I could get a free copy of SNG Wizard for playing on that site. And they had these double-or-nothings which were great because the player pool was so soft, you could cash like 10 times in a row lol.

Anybody else think it'd be fun to have games here at Stars where half the field got a payout, and the payout was the same for everybody? Maybe not for 180's, but like with STT's? The 50/50's are so hard to make a profit with it seems ...
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 06:04 PM
(#9)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,802
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
Mox,

I look at it this way (maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong).. but the sooner the bubble's gone, the sooner I can start chipping up.
Abusing the shorter stacks at an earlier bubble, when there are more of them just trying to sneak in... should net me (and you) more chips for a deeper run. Yes, the times it backfires, we'll get less out of it, but by using the bubble to our advantage, I think we just might end up with more top 3's out of it.

Hopefully someday, time will tell, but that's the way I'm looking at it.

Use my last 5 45's as an example... 3 cashes and two 8th's... if those 8th's turn into even a breakeven number, that's gonna up the ROI because I'm still going for a top 3 and have no problem going busto in 8th if my choice is to take a +EV play for a top 3 run or bust on the bubble. I'm going for it (before BF, I'd wait until after, then climb).

I'm expecting my deep run % to go way up, but don't see a huge hit in the ITM% either.

John (JWK24)


Super-Moderator



6 Time Bracelet Winner


 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:38 PM
(#10)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Meh,to me it just creates a second bubble,in a way. As the 19-27 level payout is so meaningless as to be ignored. In my mind this has just created one long,protracted bubble from around 30ish left to 19,as it's from the 10-18 payout level and on where one will be getting any kind of decent payback for their efforts.

Really,really,really do not like this myself. One thing I've been doing in our "time off" from playing for money here is scouting out the games that would be in my BR menu for when we start back up and the games I would be looking to be on the next rung of the ladder,then the one after that and so on. I had immediately dismissed the $1 180 man's (hyper-turbo's not my cup of tea) but was OK with a regular turbo structure so the $2.50's were and eventual target game.

Now?

Meh,not as attractive to me as they were at this time yesterday,let's put it that way.


Here's a thought I've been kicking around in my head since seeing this...

What if Stars created a Red and a Black Series of games for each level for 45,90 and 180 man SNG's?

Red Series could be a more stringent,top heavy payout structure---say only top 5 for 45 man's paid,top 8 for 90 man's and top 12 for 180's. Less spots,bigger rewards.

The Black Series could be a more forgiving,less rewarding structure,say top 9 spots for 45 man's,top 15 for 90's and this top 27 structure for 180's.
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:28 PM
(#11)
steveisnot's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 467
Damn and Blast (or words to that affect)

Just check my results. In the $4.50 180's, I'd be $6.62 better off under the new structure on the 123 games I've played. Although I would be down in the $11 buy in..... A whole $0.07.

Be intresting to see other peoples results if they apply the new pay out to their history. Someone who does well at them. Which I don't. Marvin maybe?

Still less likely to play these tournies now. Like effsea, I think I'm better than I am.

Thanks for the vote Sam

Mox. Glad someone else see's it the same way. The rest of you are all crazy

And right with you on the 7th in the 45's. Having recently spotted that the sister site only pays the top six in their 45's I'll be giving them a go as soon as I have the FPP's I need here.

John, I am also surprised that you aim for flatter pay structures. Your explanation does make some sence, but I
think Moxie is making a good point. Not that I know *&@%

Guess it shows a differents in attitude. Grinder versus One time big time.

And who voted for 50% pay out? That shows a real lack of ambition!
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:38 PM
(#12)
steveisnot's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 467
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post

Here's a thought I've been kicking around in my head since seeing this...

What if Stars created a Red and a Black Series of games for each level for 45,90 and 180 man SNG's?

Red Series could be a more stringent,top heavy payout structure---say only top 5 for 45 man's paid,top 8 for 90 man's and top 12 for 180's. Less spots,bigger rewards.

The Black Series could be a more forgiving,less rewarding structure,say top 9 spots for 45 man's,top 15 for 90's and this top 27 structure for 180's.
Like it. And as I said, in the other thread, I'm willing to bet the top heavy tournies would fill faster.

Not with PSO members apparently.
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:27 PM
(#13)
JWK24's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 24,802
(Super-Moderator)
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
Here's a thought I've been kicking around in my head since seeing this...

What if Stars created a Red and a Black Series of games for each level for 45,90 and 180 man SNG's?

Red Series could be a more stringent,top heavy payout structure---say only top 5 for 45 man's paid,top 8 for 90 man's and top 12 for 180's. Less spots,bigger rewards.

The Black Series could be a more forgiving,less rewarding structure,say top 9 spots for 45 man's,top 15 for 90's and this top 27 structure for 180's.
Mox, send that in to ideas@pokerstars.com. That actually IS a good idea, IMO.

John (JWK24)


Super-Moderator



6 Time Bracelet Winner


 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:34 PM
(#14)
shirshot's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 665
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post

Here's a thought I've been kicking around in my head since seeing this...

What if Stars created a Red and a Black Series of games for each level for 45,90 and 180 man SNG's?

Red Series could be a more stringent,top heavy payout structure---say only top 5 for 45 man's paid,top 8 for 90 man's and top 12 for 180's. Less spots,bigger rewards.

The Black Series could be a more forgiving,less rewarding structure,say top 9 spots for 45 man's,top 15 for 90's and this top 27 structure for 180's.
great idea
 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 11:14 PM
(#15)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,481
(Head Trainer)
I prefer the top heavy payouts to flat payouts in mtt's (I consider 180's straight up mtt's, not sng's). That being said, I am in general agreement on the flatter the payout being good for the recreational player (and by extension, more recreational players good for the winning regs). So no problem with 10% of the field getting paid but 15% is ok as a compromise.

Although the last vote entry was probably a bit tongue in cheek (90), I actually think that would be an interesting format that might be popular (180-man Double or Nothings). Would never replace the regular game with it obv, but might make for an interesting additional offering.


Head Live Trainer
Check out my Videos

4 Time Bracelet Winner



 
Old
Default
Mon Feb 11, 2013, 11:31 PM
(#16)
Spartan642's Avatar
Since: Jul 2011
Posts: 73
Didnt know about the structure change but do welcome it.I too JWK chase flatter payout structures and up to now would never play those 90/180 SNGs.I just wish there was some regular tourneys that have flatter structures.

Moxie , like your idea of the Red/Black format.Bring it on STARS !

ps my ITM currently 70% this year ! lol
 
Old
Default
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:30 AM
(#17)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
For all the peeps the said they liked my idea on the "Red and Black" Series of games,thank you. Sent this off to the idea department,if/when I hear anything back I'll let you all know.




Hi folks,I’m writing this after seeing the tweaks you’ve made to the prize structure in the 90 and 180 person SNG’s. Naturally as an American player I can’t participate in those games as of now,but when my government finally pulls their collectives heads out of their hindparts (I should live so long...) I’m hoping to again.

My thought,after a fellow poster in the English version Poker School Online started a poll on the subject,was that some people seem to prefer the former structure,or even a MORE top heavy one,and others the newer structure (poll was conducted for the 180 person SNG’s,as the tweak in the 90 person game was so minimal).

Here’s what I was thinking....

Maybe come up with something like,for the sake of calling it anything really,a Red and Black series of games for the 45,90 and 180 persons SNG’s.

Have the Red Series be a more stringent,higher risk,higher reward prize structure,say top 5 only paid in the 45’s,top 9 (FT or bust...) in the 90’s and top 12 only in the 180’s.

Then the Black Series could be more structured to a flatter payout scale,more people getting smaller prizes. Possibly 9 players cash in the 45’s,15 in the 90’s and the 27 person structure you’ve already introduced in the 180’s.

I think that you can’t go wrong giving your customers more choices,and you would very possibly even see players boost their plays in these games as they would be curious to try out each format. Plus if you come up with a marketing campaign for the games I think it would spark good interest for you. Knowing you guys I’m sure that wouldn’t be a problem for you.

Hope you like the idea,respectfully yours...

Ken (Moxie Pip)
 
Old
Default
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:35 AM
(#18)
Barbzz's Avatar
Since: Jun 2012
Posts: 51
BronzeStar
I would say in general I would prefer a top heavy payout structure as they are the spots I play for (and finish in often), however (for $8 180's this is) the prize for top 2 has stayed the same, 3rd-8th has lost about 1BI, 9th and 10th-18th has lost about 1/2 a BI, with 19-27 basically picking up 1BI. I am sure that a lot of regs would have complained if the top prizes were affected, so kudos to stars for keeping the top prizes the same. To anyone who says the recreational player won't be happy because they wont be able to win as much for the top prizes, recreational players rarely win anyway, especially from $8 upwards, so giving an extra 9 spots where the recreational players get their money back is a good thing, the more of them the better so overall I dont mind this change

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveisnot View Post
Be intresting to see other peoples results if they apply the new pay out to their history. Someone who does well at them. Which I don't. Marvin maybe?
I just did a quick calculation of mine at the $8 180 mans, over 300 games I would have won an extra 3BI using the new payout structure lol, its not really an accurate sample as the ROI is not sustainable over a bigger sample. But this payout structure will mean less variance since my winnings are basically the same, but my itm goes from 12.3% (old structure) to 18.9% (new structure). Also with the bubble being at a different stage the players will have a different game at different time ie start getting more aggessive when the 27 player bubble bursts instead of the 18 players, meaning people will have more time before the FT to accumulate chips


Edit: I think Mox's idea is a brilliant one!! I always think to myself how I would like poker to be lower variance, but also how a higher ROI would be nicer (well who doesnt lol), I would have a hard time choosing between the formats... it would also be interesting to see which one would run more often, I would guess the red series (paying out less people) would attract more fish even though their ROI would be worse, because of the regs having bigger ROI

Last edited by Barbzz; Tue Feb 12, 2013 at 01:50 AM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 02:05 AM
(#19)
ForrestFive's Avatar
Since: May 2011
Posts: 2,036
If I recall correctly all SNGs are 75bb start 1500 chips.

Blind structure specifically 15min for the x180 then reduced to 10min only?

Battle of the planets has a short field +$$ promotion x27 (10min) or less to the turbos (5min) structure or hyper 6-max - less time.

What do you want 3K or 5K starting chips for a 20min level SNG or make it an MTT with 1 or 2 hour late reg?

I don't agree that a x180 STT compares with an MTT with 1, 2 or 3 hours late reg that we have today on-line.

Well if you increase the blind levels the SNG tournament takes longer so the rake/entrance-fee is higher.

The number crunchers are so good.
 
Old
Default
Tue Feb 12, 2013, 01:07 PM
(#20)
TheLangolier's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 13,481
(Head Trainer)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbzz View Post
I would say in general I would prefer a top heavy payout structure as they are the spots I play for (and finish in often), however (for $8 180's this is) the prize for top 2 has stayed the same, 3rd-8th has lost about 1BI, 9th and 10th-18th has lost about 1/2 a BI, with 19-27 basically picking up 1BI. I am sure that a lot of regs would have complained if the top prizes were affected, so kudos to stars for keeping the top prizes the same. To anyone who says the recreational player won't be happy because they wont be able to win as much for the top prizes, recreational players rarely win anyway, especially from $8 upwards, so giving an extra 9 spots where the recreational players get their money back is a good thing, the more of them the better so overall I dont mind this change
Didn't realize this, then in this case I think the change is excellent personally. Same top 2 payouts for the serious player, and more recreational players squeaking into the money which keeps more of them both interested and in action.


Head Live Trainer
Check out my Videos

4 Time Bracelet Winner



 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com