blinds at Gala have become a bad joke

[Nightfly]

little tip

is increase the blinds faster just after the rebuy period and slow them down as you aproach the end game

this can be done 2 ways

1) change clock then slow it down
2) remove a blind level or 2 early doors and put in a level or 2 nearer the end of the comp

i find 2 the better way to do this

I have considered both of these options

1) is a viable solution but those who have the power of veto are not sure if we are allowed to do that etc.

the problem with 2 is that as it affects a greater number of players the ratio of complaints is higher.

In actual fact the majority of the players who make the business end of the tournaments just get on and play. Only a small minority actually complain about how unfair the blind structure is. And these complaints have usually been preceeded by a bad-beat or an outdraw. Oddly enough only one person who has won a competition has criticised the blind structure. But you can't please everybody.

[Longy]

The other solution that has been put forward for Notts comps are that we move the starting time forward. Is this a viable option (i can't see why not) but i don't know whether the casino has other views on this. I think 8pm is a realistic start time for events instead of 9:15 it gives another hour, also i think the rebuy period could be shortened as well to maybe 75 mins.

[Nightfly]

When I have queried the cardroom managers about the situation the only explanation for the new blind structure is to avoid a chip count at the end of the night. I think this is a very weak argument and would prefer the option of a chip count than shoving my stack in with A 6 and hoping nobody calls.

This is actually not true. The so called 'new ante structure' is more or less exactly the same as the old one if you halve the blinds.

The explanation:

Instead of giving 1000 points per buy in we give 2000.
Instead of starting the blinds at 25/50 we start the blinds at 50/100

both of these transformations were achieved by multiplying by 2

So why do this?...

Current stock of 25 point chips = 199
this allows 99 starting sets to be made.
99 starting sets are not quite enough for 120 runners.

Current stock of 50 point chips = 400
this allows 200 starting sets to be made
200 starting sets are more than enough for 120 runners.


Plenty of 100 pt and 500pt chips allow tables to be started with sufficient amount of change ie: more yellows than before.

Pot limit competitions with 25 point chips can lead to fiddly raise amounts ie: 175, 525 etc which can lead to more arguments about the correctness of pots.
Multiples of 50 are easier mathematically 350, 1050 for comparison.

4 denominations of chips at any one time is more than enough.
5 denominations can lead to confusion and disputes.

Only 4 round ups are required during the course of the tournament instead of 5. (This may not seem like a significant difference but from a supervision point of view it is probably the best of the justifications so far)

More hands are dealt during the rebuy period because the pots are less fiddly to work out and dealers tend to be more efficient. Players also tend to call with the correct change rather than requiring change from oversized chips.

Having first trialed this on all competition nights it was deemed that it constituted a massive improvement to the structure and flow of the tournament from both points of view (Players and Staff wise)

(So far this has absolutely nothing to do with preventing a chip count)

So has anything actually changed for the worse? Is the blind structure more agressive than it used to be?

The value for money with regard to buy in amount has not changed: you get twice as many chips but the blinds are twice as big.

Starting at Level 1:

25/50 becomes 50/100
50/100 becomes 100/200
100/200 becomes 200/400
150/300 becomes 300/600 (This level was added in July of this year actully slowing down the previous structure)
200/400 becomes 400/800
300/600 becomes 600/1200
400/800 becomes 800/1600 (This level was introduced in October 2004; before that they went from 300/600 to 500/1000 [and then to 800/1600]. In fact 500/1000 was removed and replaced with 2 levels 400/800 and then 600/1200 which if you average them out is like a double level at 500/1000)

I apologise if this is becoming repetitive but it seems necessary to show that nothing untoward has been performed on the old structure and that all new levels are simply double the old ones....

Until this point:

600/1200 becomes 1000/2000 and not 1200/2400
800/1600 becomes 1500/3000 and not 1600/3200

This must surely represent 40 minutes of value gained... the blinds are not proportionately high as they used to be... IS THIS a bad joke??? IS THIS SILLY???

Do you see my point?
 read the subject line of this thread and please explain to me how this is worse - Double chips and LOWER blind levels.

I spend about 3 unpaid hours per day working on ways to improve the way we do things or administrating the poker league and i think very carefully before i implement any changes (Hence four trials). To have the improvements that i have worked long and hard to implement, trashed as a 'bad joke' is utterly disrespectful of that work (carried out on behalf of all players in response to appropriately offered feedback and suggestions).

Sure people are entitled to their opinions. But so am I.

I have been into work today, even though i am on holiday, and have made some progress on trialing earlier starts for some competitions.

I have spent about 5 hours this evening racking my brains about this thread. I am on holiday and that is not fair. I work so hard to improve things in nottingham and when I do i get this.


take the chips multiply them by 2
take the old blind structure multiply it by 2

the blind structure has always gone up to 5000/10000

10,000/20,000 is only twice as much as that and you have twice as many chips.

600,000 chips puts 30 big blinds in play with the new blind structure
300,000 chips puts 30 big blinds in play with the old blind structure

[dik9]

Here speaketh the truth!!!! Nice reply. If ever you want to change casinos or wish to move to Brum. Get in touch.
Whats wrong with you guys? Here is someone that obviously cares about his game more than most. We try and improve things for the players benefit, but get criticised by the people that liked it before any changes were made. Changes are almost always made because a MAJORITY dislike something. We don't change things just to pee players off!! Please give Nightfly a break, he sounds like he is on your side !!!!! Keep him on side for gods sake.

[Phil]

Great post Rob. I've not played myself in the competition in question, but to me the changes seem to make sense for all concerned.

[AdamM]

for me the frustration is actually that Rob isn't the card room manager.I wish he was because then I'd feel the chances of positive change would always be greater. I think the doubling of stacks/blinds and removal of 25s is great and would like to see it rolled out to al comps. earlier starts, shorter rebuy periods and most of all NON SMOKING are the main issues. I played both comps sunday plus some cash inbetween and when I got knocked out around midnight it was actually something of a relief. after 9 hours straight in there I felt like I'd smoked a pack of 20 (infact I probably did) and I was starting to feel pretty sick. driving home with the windows down was followed by two restless hours feeling like someone was sitting on my chest sticking a knife in my throat. why did I ever do that to myself.

[Phil]

The smoking issue is bizarre. I think most people would welcome a ban. I'm a smoker and I'd be more than happy for it to stop. Even as a smoker that room is a lot for me to take.

[chrisbruce]

Rob

Thank you for taking the time to reply and explain the blind structure and reasoning etc. As I said in my post earlier I do not have the facts and therefore can only express views on my perception of how the tournament seems to have changed with the new blind structure. As you have now stated the facts and I am wrong I appologise to you for a badly worded topic.

I think this has been a healthy debate and I do not regret raising the subject afterall that is the purpose of this forum and I am pleasantly enlightened by other peoples views.


As I said if due to time restraints and numbers involved this is how the tournament has to played then so be it.

See you on Sunday

Chris

[Nightfly]

Chris

Thanks for your response I do appreciate feedback and if it were not for this forum there would be many a time when i am left scratching my head, not knowing what to do.

It is a sad fact that while we operate under such rigid time restraints it will always feel like things are rushed.

A Good tournament structure must allow x number of starting players to become y number of finalists with in the allocated time frame. It must also allow sufficient time for the final to be played to a conclusion.

Freeze-out tournaments are a lot easier to predict. You can establish a maximum number of chips in play and work from that.

Re-buy competitions are a different beast altogether. History teaches us that there will be somewhere between 3 to 4.5 total buy-ins per runner.

If there are only 3 then the blinds will seem larger in the later stages
if there are 4 or above then they will feel a lot more reasonable.

I am still trying to address your question as to why we cannot cap the blinds. I hope the eventual answer will prove both informative and explanatory.

Stay tuned for more.

[RED-DOG]

Here speaketh the truth!!!! Nice reply. If ever you want to change casinos or wish to move to Brum. Get in touch.
Whats wrong with you guys? Here is someone that obviously cares about his game more than most. We try and improve things for the players benefit, but get criticised by the people that liked it before any changes were made. Changes are almost always made because a MAJORITY dislike something. We don't change things just to pee players off!! Please give Nightfly a break, he sounds like he is on your side !!!!! Keep him on side for gods sake.

"Whats wrong with you guys"?

Has there been a post criticising Rob?

[snoopy1239]

Looks like the Gala are lucky to have Nightfly. 

[Karabiner]

A rather hasty and ill-considered title for this thread. IMHO

I would recommend counting to ten and having several deep breaths before posting 

[dik9]

"Whats wrong with you guys"?

Has there been a post criticising Rob?

Not directly, but there has been criticism of his cardroom. WE take this personally, even though some things are out of our control. This is why we get frustrated. If someone criticised the casino I work for, then I too would feel (as the person that represented it on this forum) that the posts would be pointing vaguely in my direction. Criticism is made for an outcome, therefore as representatives we feel we should pass it on to the changemakers. It is good to hear voices, so we know what you feel we are doing wrong. Somethings we can change and something we can't (this one is extremely frustrating, especially when WE agree).

[ifm]

Not directly, but there has been criticism of his cardroom. WE take this personally, even though some things are out of our control. This is why we get frustrated. If someone criticised the casino I work for, then I too would feel (as the person that represented it on this forum) that the posts would be pointing vaguely in my direction. Criticism is made for an outcome, therefore as representatives we feel we should pass it on to the changemakers. It is good to hear voices, so we know what you feel we are doing wrong. Somethings we can change and something we can't (this one is extremely frustrating, especially when WE agree).

Beer prices

[dik9]

Exactly