Flatter Payout Structures - "It's Your Money" have your say - Elimination Poll 1

[RED-DOG]

I see it the other way Adam, Ive met some scumbags at the table, but not as many as Ive met decent blokes

[AdamM]

I hope that more experience and travel gives me the same

I admit the number of decent guys I'm meeting is increasing, particularly the longer I'm involved with the Blondites I've met. when I'm raking it in with the T-Shirt business (news on that will follow) I can spend more time at the tables and get out and meet more of the good guys.

[ifm]

A great advert for Gala Notts though Adam 
I'll get my coat............

[AdamM]

does sound a bit like that doesn't it. there's only probably around 25% I'd consider unsavoury characters. Then theres around 10%/15% that are good'uns then there's people I either don't know enough to have an opinion of or I know are only passing through.

I didn't mean to make it sound like it was full of scumbags I still don't consider myself as part of an "us" with most though

[Nightfly]

Ok, here as promised is a statistics overload which will show the different types of outcomes tournaments have, and more importantly what the overall effect of these outcomes is on the actual percentages by position compared to the proposed (official) percentages by position.

The statistics are for 92 competitions, mostly Pot-Limit Re-buys, from this year.
The official Prize structure pays 10 as follows:

1st  40%
2nd  20%
3rd - 10%
4th - 7.5%
5th - 6%
6th - 5%
7th - 4%
8th - 3%
9th - 2.5%
10th - 2%

Competitions with more than 10 prizes have only included the top 10. It should be noted that any decision by the remaining players to pay a saver for 11th or 12th usually comes off the top prize. This has the effect of increasing some of the lower placings to more than the official % payout (as only the money paid to the last 10 has been analysed.)

Method of Conclusion of 92 Tournaments

Outright winner:- 5 or 5.4%
Deals Made:-    63 or 68.5%
Chip Count:-     24 or 26.1%

Of The 63 Tournaments which ended in deals:

19 were made with 2 players remaining (21% of comps)
17 were made with 3 remaining (18%)
19 with four remaining (21%)
7 with 5 remaining (8%)
And amazingly
1 with 6 remaining (1%)

Of the 24 which ended in a chip count:

6 were 2 player chip counts (7%)
4 were 3 player chip counts (4%)
7 were 4 player chip counts (8%)
4 were 5 player chip counts (4%)
1 was a 6 player affair (1%)
And 2 were 7 player jobbies (Borrowed this word from tikays poker glossary) (2%)

Staying with chip counts for a moment:
Any competition which still has 7 players remaining when it ends is either the result of extremely tight play, or it is a tournament structure issue.

670,000 points in play blinds @ 5000/10,000
7 players average stack = 96K = 9.5 Big Blinds

An earlier start time with more time to play would certainly help. BUT when you have time constraints a tournament must be structured so that it has a more than reasonable chance of finishing within a set timescale. In this instance the capping of blinds at 3K/6K is not a solution.

The net effect of Chip Counts (whether 2,3, 4 or more players are involved) on the payouts per position is as follows:

1st  27.9%
2nd  20.3%
3rd - 14.5%
4th - 11.0%
5th - 8.1%
6th - 5.9%
7th - 4.6
8th - 3%
9th - 2.5%
10th - 2%

Note That 2nd Prize is the only one close to the official mark!

An alternative to a looming chip count is to decide upon a deal.

The interesting thing about deals is the different variety of deals proposed by all manner of different players. They are not always proposed by the same people. In fact in the 63 competitions where deals have been made 112 different players have had a go at refining and restructuring the payouts to suit their own ends.

So do these deals create a better payout structure than chip counts?
Can we assume that the amount paid out in deals is the collective subconscious desired payout structure of 112 players?

 The answers to these questions will be found in my second essay on the subject. But for now Ill leave it with you as food for thought.

[RED-DOG]

Dont know about anyone else Nightfly, but I find these statistics facinating, and where else would we get to see them, well done and thanks

[Junior Senior]

excellent Rob!
just goes to show that 40% for first is probably both undesirable and unachievable in most comps - so why not reduce it down to 30% and overall flatten the structure in order to encourage play.  However as long as the blinds remain so high and the clock so fast you will still get (IMO) 3 and 4 way deals.

good stats though - look forward to more

[Karabiner]

An excellent and eye-opening analysis.

Nottm. Gala is lucky to have someone who is so interested in the job at hand.

If only they would give you dealers and allow the competitions to start earlier.

I am sure that we would then have the best cardroom in the country.

K

[ifm]

Don't forget to get rid of the scumbags 

[Karabiner]

Well give or take a cockroach or two. !

 

[Nightfly]

excellent Rob!
just goes to show that 40% for first is probably both undesirable and unachievable in most comps - so why not reduce it down to 30% and overall flatten the structure in order to encourage play. However as long as the blinds remain so high and the clock so fast you will still get (IMO) 3 and 4 way deals.

good stats though - look forward to more

Glad you like the statistics guys...
was a little worried that you may find them dull and laborious to work through.

will happily provide some more.

these type of statistics are not really available anywhere else but they do show important features of the state of poker tournaments at the moment. i know that they only come from one club but i would be very surprised if it were not the picture elsewhere.

am preparing part two of my essay at the moment (really feels like a school project ) this focusses on the different types of deals done(but not so much on the reasons why)

[tikay]

Amending the Prize Structure?

JUST DO IT.

PS - Good work Rob.

[Nightfly]

Nightflys school project (Part 2)

The Nature of Deals:

Imagine that you have settled down to watch the Grand National. Youve just rushed back from the bookies where youve had a few each-way flutters. The race starts and for the first circuit of Aintree, horses are falling at fences left right and centre. Three quarters of the race is run and only five horses are still going. Suddenly they all stop, the jockeys dismount and start walking leisurely towards the finishing line, leading their horses and conversing all the while. They all cross the line together and inform the waiting official Weve agreed to split the Prize Money

This would hardly make for interesting viewing.

With the increasing incidence of televised poker events, deals are becoming less desirable. Who wants to watch a discussion about who could have what and why.
People who follow these events want to see a result.

People ask me most nights in the Card Room, Who won last night?
The answer more often than not is that Nobody actually won, but So-and-So took the most money

Why are so many deals done?

The prize structure probably has a lot to do with it.
Players want to see a big first prize, Casinos do too to some extent. It adds a little bit of sensationalism to the event.

In reality, very few players ever receive this prize. So shouldnt we be honest and make the payout structures reflect reality rather than some impossible dream.

There was a player the other day who felt that 1st prize should be 60% yet there he was down to last four discussing a money split. We could make 1st prize 60% but this player always makes deals so would he ever play for it? Probably not.

If 3,4 or 5 players are regularly altering the payouts at the business end of a tournament, we must take their alterations to be a version of what they would consider to be a just reward for the performance they have delivered.

So Many deals are done that they actually combine to make a brand new payout structure. One that has been forged and shaped by more than 100 players, amateurs and professionals, new players, old players. People with plenty of money, people who really could do with the money etc.

How does this new payout structure compare to the official one and how do deals fare against chip counts?

Read on and all will be revealed

Two Player Deals: 19 in 63 or 30% of deals
Official Payout Structure:
1st  40%
2nd  20%
3rd - 10%


As Snoopy1239 said earlier in this thread:

IMHO, the gap in general between 1st and 2nd is way too big, especially when considering the potential swings in heads-up play. closing the gap should result in players being less scared about being knocked out and more reluctant to make deals. It wouldn't solve the problem all together, but it would be a start.

This in a nutshell explains why deals are done at this point.
1st Prize is twice as much money as 2nd
For some, this risk is too great.

Deals between two players only fall into two categories

The Money is split equally (9 times out of 19)

Either because of similar stack size or same village
Leading to a structure as follows:

1st  30%
2nd  30%
3rd - 10%

Or

The money is split roughly proportionate to chips (10 times in 19)

Chip leader shows their benevolence by offering billy low stack a little more than 2nd prize to avoid playing endless heads-up where anything can change.

1st  35%
2nd  25%
3rd - 10%

Overall structure suggested by all two player deals

1st  33%
2nd  27%
3rd - 10%

2nd place gains at the expense of 1st

Three Player Deals: 17 in 63 or 27% of deals
Three player deals usually follow one of two types although the second type has 3 sub types

Proportionate split (Immediate end to play) 5 in 17
Chip leader shows their benevolence by offering billy medium stack a little more than 2nd prize and billy low stack a little more than 3rd

1st  29%
2nd  23%
3rd - 18%

There were no equal 3 way splits in the data!


12 in 17 Three way deals:
The other 3 player deals all start the same way and actually allow for play to continue (this is also the nature of many 4 and 5 way deals)

The players wish to continue playing but would like to make sure that their eventual reward is sufficient. Usually phrased as Everybody gets x and the winner takes the rest

Many people who go on to win these would actually claim to have won a competition. The deal changes things though they are playing with fully comprehensive insurance!

Either these conclude as stated (6 in 17)

1st  29%
2nd  20%
3rd - 20%

Or
Once a player is done the last two split (5 in 17)

1st  25%
2nd  25%
3rd - 20%
 
Or They end in a Chip Count (1 in 17)

1st  28%
2nd  24%
3rd - 18%

The overall effect of 3 way deals is
1st  28%
2nd  22.5%
3rd - 19%
4th - 7.5%
I could look at four and higher deals the same way but this is already getting longer than I had planned.

Four way deals (19 in 63) give a structure of

1st -    25.6%
2nd -    19.9%
3rd -    16.4%
4th -    15.0%
5th -    6.2%


Five Way (7 in 63) deals give a structure of
1st -    21.5%
2nd -    18.3%
3rd -    15.6%
4th -    14.7%
5th -    13.0%
6th -    5.1%
   
 And the 1 six way deal went as follows

1st -    18.8%
2nd -    16.2%
4th -    14.9%
3rd -    14.9%
5th -    13.6%
6th -    10.0%
7th -    4.0%


After all Deals are considered the Actual distribution of prizes per position in these 69 competitions (Decided upon by 112 individuals) was:

1st -    27.5%
2nd -    22.2%
3rd -    14.7%
4th -    10.9%
5th -    7.4%
6th -    5.5%
7th -    4.1%
8th -    3.1%
9th -    2.6%
10th -    2.1%
 Comparing this to the effect of Chip Counts

1st  27.9%
2nd  20.3%
3rd - 14.5%
4th - 11.0%
5th - 8.1%
6th - 5.9%
7th - 4.6
8th - 3%
9th - 2.5%
10th - 2%

The two outcomes are remarkably similar.

Do these represent a more realistic prize structure. Most of the time 1st position does not get 30%.

Are these Percentages not closer to those in Option 5 of the poll than any of the others?

Incorporating all results the actual breakdown per position of over 776,000
Is as follows

1st -   218,285.00   - 28.1%
2nd -   170,435.00   - 22.0%
3rd -   107,960.00   - 13.9%
4th -    83,370.00   - 10.7%
5th -    59,260.00   - 7.6%
6th -    43,600.00   - 5.6%
7th -    33,305.00   - 4.3%
8th -    23,835.00   - 3.1%
9th -    19,945.00   - 2.6%
10th -    16,135.00   - 2.1%

[snoopy1239]

Wow. Do you have Red Bull on tap?

[Junior Senior]

absolutely fascinating! - you should get a pay rise! - how does 5.25 an hour sound? 

Rob, this looks to me along with the poll so far like you have your answer with which to either just go ahead and change it or go to the management with a proposal.

Great work, i look forward to seeing the new structure implemented shortly.