The Main Event at The Vic

[Royal Flush]

Sod the structure, when are they gonna get a proper bar license, every other Grosvenor casino has a late license except the vic...  I had to sober up twice in 1 week ffs

lol

[tikay]

I still have The Vic "flyer" IKI, & it is very comprehensive indeed, & apropos structures, it lists EVERY blind level.

But, conspicious by it's absence, it does not even mention the "clock" or lengths of the levels in the Main Event, but it gives this info for EVERY other comp.

One has to assume this was by design, rather than accident. Presumbly, they wanted to give themselves room for maneouvre.

Were any levels removed Tikay?
i.e 75  150  or 150  300.
It seems everyone mentions these 2 levels and I was wondering if they were in the original programme but removed on the day

The very comprehensive Flyer - all 18 pages of it - listed every Level for every comp.

The Main Event did NOT have a 75-150 or a 150-300.

It did have a 500-1,000.

During the entire Fessie, no Events had a 500-1,000 Level EXCEPT the Main Event

During the entire Fessie NO Events had a 75-150 Level..

One Event - the £750 Freezeout - had a 150-300. This was the only Event to have this Level.

Clocks:

These were the advertised clocks, as indicated in the the Flyer.

The £200 PLH had a 30 minute clock all the way.

The £100 Super Sat had a 30 minute clock all the way.

The £750 Freeze had a 45 minute clock all the way.

The £250 PL Hi-Lo had a 30 minute clock all the way.

The £1,000 PLO had a 30 minute clock for the first 2 levels, then 45 minutes all the way.

The Main Event did not have the "clock" listed - it was not mentioned anywhere in the flyer.

I do believe it would have been better to say something like this for the Main Event, assuming they wanted to be certain they could get the Comp finished in time........

"This Event will run to a xx minute clock, but we reserve the right to reduce the Clock if we are running behind schedule".

[matt674]

So if the structure was advertised so far in advance - why were so many people complaining about it? Surely a good poker player can adapt to any structure once announced.

I hear people talking about "taking a game plan" with them before the start of a tournament - i have to admit i try and do the same for either a live or online tournament but then depending on what kind of table i am at when the tournament commences my game plan may go out of the window in the first five minutes.

Like the camel mentions in his report - people complained about the structure and yet the final table was made up of well known professional players, that cant be just a coincidence.

I agree that the length of the levels cannot change from one day to the next in a "two start day" tournament as this could give unfair advantage to the players on one particular start day over another. Like someone has already suggested earlier in this thread, just start the tournament early enough so that you give yourself enough time to reach your alloted number of players in plenty of time.

If you announce that you want each day to play down to say 60-70 players after 8 levels start early enough so that you will easily get the 8 levels in, on day 1a, if after the 8th level you have 70 players or less then the tournament finishes for the day and everyone goes home for an early night or moves tables for a crack at the cash games. If on day 1b you still have 85 players by the time you reach the end of level 8 carry on playing on that level until you have reached your alloted figure of 70. If the tournament has started early enough there should still be enough time left to play down to the target number without having to change any of the levels time length.

With the sudden boom in this game in the last few years it is hardly surprising that the magic formula has yet to be discovered, a few years ago a big main event tournament may have only attracted 100 runners - now 3-4 years later the same big main event is attracting 300 runners, with many more reserves chomping at the bit to be included. Surely you have to allow time for cardrooms to find what structure will work for the large numbers now wanting to participate.

If i remember correctly when the EPT first started a few years back John Duthie came in for a lot of stick for how the tournaments were not able to cope with the demand for seats and that the structures in some of the tournaments were not suitable. Now (with the possible exception of one of the events) most people are praising John and the casinos for how well the EPT events are organised. (this is the impression i am getting from reading the reports anyway after my feeble attempt to just miss out on 4 EPT main event satellites meant not managing to attend one of the events this year)

Now with the ever increasing ability to voice opinions in forums like this the publics opinions are allowed to raise queries and questions and if the concensus is large enough cardrooms cant fail to take notice. Whether they act on the public opinion only time will tell...........

[tikay]

I agree with a fair bit of that Matt, but I do think we ought to know in advance what the clock is for any big buy-in event.

I tend to ask, when considering playing ANY major Comp, "what's the clock?", & I think many peeeps do the same.

But as I never lasted 2 Levels, it was all a bit hypothetical in my case!

But yes, the "levels" WERE widely advertised in advance.

[matt674]

When you say "in advance" how far in advance do you mean? If i remember correctly you played on day 1b of the two starting days and therefore knew after seeing the reports from day 1a you would have known how long the clock was - is that not advance enough?

Everyone must have known that the levels would have been AT LEAST 45 minutes in length - if they arrive only to be told "actually we're going to start on an hour clock and see how it goes", what difference would that have made to anyones preparation - so long as everyone knows once the tournament begins?

Forgive the many questions but as i'm not a regular live tournament player i cant see how much difference it makes how soon in advance people know of the length of the levels.

[tikay]

Yes, you are correct Matt, I DID know 24 hours in advance what the levels were. But largely speaking, I have not been criticising the structure, although most peeps have.

But in my case, had I known it was starting at 45 minutes, I would not have played it. I could have withdawn? Yes. But I'd won my seat weeks in advance, & made plans based around the Event, booked my Hotel, aranged various meetings in london, da de da de da, so at 24 hours notice, it was not convenient to withdraw.

My position on this debate has remained the same throughout - I am trying to ensure BOTH sides of the argument are well-aired, and I'm pretty much the only one who is!

And my early exit was not connected to the structure by the way. It was something to do with being a part of the marine world.

[matt674]

This is why i ask the questions as i, like many of the blondites on the forum, do not play in the main events of these festivals on a regular basis. I read all these threads of complaint and think "what are they complaining about? 45 minutes, 60 minutes - there cant be that much difference provided everyone knows when the tournaments commences".

So why would you not have played in the tournament if you would have known that the levels were only 45 minutes, even though you won your seat in a satellite?

If the clock would have been 60 minutes would you have played and what major difference would the extra 15 minutes make in influencing your decision to play (lol, in some casino's i've played in the past with all the dwelling that occurs you would only probably get an extra round in per level!!  )

[tikay]

This is why i ask the questions as i, like many of the blondites on the forum, do not play in the main events of these festivals on a regular basis. I read all these threads of complaint and think "what are they complaining about? 45 minutes, 60 minutes - there cant be that much difference provided everyone knows when the tournaments commences".

So why would you not have played in the tournament if you would have known that the levels were only 45 minutes, even though you won your seat in a satellite?

If the clock would have been 60 minutes would you have played and what major difference would the extra 15 minutes make in influencing your decision to play (lol, in some casino's i've played in the past with all the dwelling that occurs you would only probably get an extra round in per level!!  )

Because, for me PERSONALLY, I prefer a 1 hour clock, that suits my game, such as it is, and for £1,500 I think I don't want to play a faster clock. I could have used my "free seat" at Luton instead, where although I have yet to see the clocks, I feel sure it will be a 1 hour jobbie, Luton usually is. It's no coincidence - in my opinion - that I have had 9 Festival Cashes at Luton in about 2 years, & none at all at The Vic! Luton clocks are usually slower, & they include 75-150 & 150-300 I believe, though I'm not 100% sure on that.

But we are not all the same, & that is my point - many good judges were happy with The Vic structure, whereas I'm just a foot-soldier.

FWIW, I believe a 1 hour clock "live" is equivelant to a 15 or 20 minute clock online. I can & do make a nice profit from playing 15 & 20 minute Online clocks.

Horses for courses. Or, in my case at The Vic, fish for courses?.

[Karabiner]

The problem was, as I see it, that it was in fact a "mystery" clock and as such was open to manipulation and abuse.

I am not suggesting that manipulation and abuse took place, just that the opportunity was there.

I cannot help but sympathise with those like Red-dog and others who were playing a shortish stack accordingly on a one hour clock at the end of a day, only to find that the next day's clock was now two hours. Obviously they would have played differently, and equally obviously it is not fair.

My own feeling is that this tourney would have worked perfectly well with a one hour clock throughout.
And to have played down to two tables on day two.

[matt674]

So basically all it boils down to is personal preference - some people prefer 45 minute clocks and some prefer 90 minute clocks.

You're not going to please all the people all the time so those that dont like it, its simple - dont play in the first place. Playing then kicking up a fuss is surely the wrong way to go about it?

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this Tikay - perhaps if all the players who had gripes would take the time to do the same then maybe the cardrooms would have more to act on?

As far as i'm aware you are correct that Luton will have the 1 hour clock but looking at their blind structure it is identical to the Vic with no 75/150 or 150/300 levels.

<post edit comments: from what i gather by reading the reports people playing in Day 1a were complaining that the tournament was fast turning into a crapshoot so to compensate the cardroom lengthened the blind levels. This lead to people complaining that its unfair that the clock should be adjusted. basically they were in a no-win situation at the time as whatever course of action they took would have drawn complaints. Is this the first time that the Vic have held a main event tournament with 2 seperate starting days?>

[I KNOW IT]

Like Karibiner says, of cause the shorter stacks would have played differently had they know it was going to be a 2 hour clock the next day instead of 45 mins.
The luck element in a 45 minute clock tourny is higher than a 90 minute tourny because you are forced to play more hands to keep up with the pace and theres a lot more gambling.
That is why the posting only the blinds when it is your turn if you are missing,or late, makes perfect sense as even if you are the big stack you still have to keep up with the  game and missing hands gives no advantage

I think everyones gripe is the inconsistancy with the levels.
If it was same time level through out I think people would have been happier.

[M3boy]

OK, when I have mentioned structure in the past about the VIC - I should of said blind levels (ie Clock).

Also, yes I should of used my Satelite win for Luton instead of the Vic - Like TK I have cashed in the last 4 festivals there, and none at the Vic.

Now from reading Keiths post, I must admit, it makes sense. Maybe I just 'prefer' the feel of the Luton scene better than the Vic? I dont know.

What I DO know is that the last major festival at the Vic - they WOULD NOT tell me the clock even the day before the comp! . Same was true this time.

The Vic do seem to "get it wrong" alot with major tourneys - whereas I have not seen this at Luton. If I was running that comp at the Vic, I would of advertised it as an Hour clock throughout - playing Thursday and Friday until 4am. Playing Saturday from 2pm till 27 remain to come back for Sunday at 2pm.

It is the changing of the clock - 45min to 60 min to 90 min back to 60min that I feel annoys most people.

I understand that it is the same for all players and you need to adapt - I fully agree with this, but clearly the blind levels were incorrect at the VIC - they even missed out the last level on days 1 and 2 for fear of not having enough players to bring back!

[tikay]

The problem was, as I see it, that it was in fact a "mystery" clock and as such was open to manipulation and abuse.

I am not suggesting that manipulation and abuse took place, just that the opportunity was there.

I cannot help but sympathise with those like Red-dog and others who were playing a shortish stack accordingly on a one hour clock at the end of a day, only to find that the next day's clock was now two hours. Obviously they would have played differently, and equally obviously it is not fair.

My own feeling is that this tourney would have worked perfectly well with a one hour clock throughout.
And to have played down to two tables on day two.

Karabiner, as usual, get it about right. I supose wiseness comes with age.

Though for the sake of record, it never went to 2 hours. It went, as I recall, 45 mins, 60 mins, 90 mins, 60 mins, 45 mins, 60 mins. I think....!

[RED-DOG]

As we neared the end of the last level on day one, I was on a short stack, and I was expecting to come back to bigger blinds and antes on day two

Therefore I considered myself to be in the position of "Having to make a move" cards not withstanding

Had I known that the same level would be repeated, and that the clock would be extended, I would have had, in my opinion, the option to wait for better hands/situations

If the goal posts are going to be moved, It's unfair to do it just when the striker has committed himself to one last desperate diving header, at the very least the players should be told in advance

My real gripe is, although they were responsible for hundreds of thousands of pounds of players money, they made it clear, (to me anyway) that they didn't care what we thought

[tikay]

So basically all it boils down to is personal preference - some people prefer 45 minute clocks and some prefer 90 minute clocks.

You're not going to please all the people all the time so those that dont like it, its simple - dont play in the first place. Playing then kicking up a fuss is surely the wrong way to go about it?

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this Tikay - perhaps if all the players who had gripes would take the time to do the same then maybe the cardrooms would have more to act on?

As far as i'm aware you are correct that Luton will have the 1 hour clock but looking at their blind structure it is identical to the Vic with no 75/150 or 150/300 levels.

<post edit comments: from what i gather by reading the reports people playing in Day 1a were complaining that the tournament was fast turning into a crapshoot so to compensate the cardroom lengthened the blind levels. This lead to people complaining that its unfair that the clock should be adjusted. basically they were in a no-win situation at the time as whatever course of action they took would have drawn complaints. Is this the first time that the Vic have held a main event tournament with 2 seperate starting days?>

As to Luton omitting the 75-150 & 150-300 Levels Matt, I am pretty sure that if we make the case to Carmel - & I intend to - she will put at least one of these in - she is very amenable to accepting player suggestions as to Prize & Tourney structure. And I strongly recommend others talk to Carmel if you have a view on the matter, because we all have different wish-lists, and I have no position to speak on behalf of others. Though if there were a body of opinion on the blonde Forum, I would convey that to Carmel at Luton. But the thing with Luton is this - you cannot moan after the Event, as they take, indeed encourage, player input before the Event.

So players should speak to them! Politely, mind, 'cos Carmel will beat you up if you don't.

In answer to youor other question, this is the 2nd time (that I am aware) that The Vic have held a Two Day Event. They got it a bit round their neck the first time - EVERY player had to turn up on Day One just to find out if they were playing on Day One or Two, it was chaotic & quite dreadful. They got that part spot on this time, so credit where credits due.