[Stocktrader]

Was thinking of something to "change things up a bit", and came up with this:

10 players usually, $25 buy-in (sometimes $50).
When you bust out, you pay EVERYONE left 1 buy-in.
Not quite a cash game, not quite a tourny.
Changes the strategy a little. My guys are game so.

I just wanted to get your opinions, thoughts etc.


Thanks

Stock

[Buzzerbeater]

Originally Posted by Stocktrader

Was thinking of something to "change things up a bit", and came up with this:

10 players usually, $25 buy-in (sometimes $50).
When you bust out, you pay EVERYONE left 1 buy-in.
Not quite a cash game, not quite a tourny.
Changes the strategy a little. My guys are game so.

I just wanted to get your opinions, thoughts etc.


Thanks

Stock

So if I go out 10th, I have to pay $225?

[Stocktrader]

Originally Posted by Buzzerbeater

So if I go out 10th, I have to pay $225?

1st gets 225
2nd 175
3rd 125
4th 75
5th 25
6th -25
7th -75
8th -125
9th -175
10 -225

[links_slayer]

Originally Posted by Buzzerbeater

So if I go out 10th, I have to pay $225?

My thoughts exactly....but if your guys are up for it, I say give it a try.

[OnTheButton]

Yikes...

IMO, that defeats the tournament "investement strategy" which is typically to pay a small amount with the chance to lose that small amount, or win a much larger amount.

[Stocktrader]

Originally Posted by OnTheButton

Yikes...

IMO, that defeats the tournament "investement strategy" which is typically to pay a small amount with the chance to lose that small amount, or win a much larger amount.

Aah, but 50% will leave with more then they started, compared to 30% in standard tourny. Also, this would be limited to 10 players.

I'm curious to see how the strategy will change. Will some people be loose early on thinking that nobody wants to get hung out in 10th? Will everyone start tight?

[Lucky Louie]

Sounds kind of steep to me, but if everyone agrees then go for it.

An alternative would be to have any person busting out have to pay $5 or $10 to each remaining player.

You could even make it an excuse to get more chips. Everyone gets 10 bounty chips and you give up just one to each remaining player upon busting out. You redeem them at the end for the given amount.

To get 50% to get paid, you could just alter your payouts to include 4th or 5th.

[ky70]

So each player would have to show up with $225 in their pocket. I'm betting this structure won't last long for 2 reasons:
1. A guy that only has $150 to lose (for example) won't show up
2. or even worse, the guy with only $150 to lose does show up, finishses in 10th place but does not have enough cash on him to meet his $225 obligation.

A little bit of 1 or 2 would end that structure quick.

[Stocktrader]

Originally Posted by ky70

So each player would have to show up with $225 in their pocket. I'm betting this structure won't last long for 2 reasons:
1. A guy that only has $150 to lose (for example) won't show up
2. or even worst, the guy with only $150 to lose does show up, finishses in 10th place but does not have enough cash on him to meet his $225 obligation.

A little bit of 1 or 2 would end that structure quick.

OK, My group plays some higher stakes occasionally.

Same thing, better numbers:

1st gets 45
2nd 35
3rd 25
4th 15
5th 5
6th -5
7th -15
8th -25
9th -35
10 -45

[whataboutj]

Is your group made up of traders like yourself? If so I think they will have fun with it (assuming the $ isn't an issue). In my experiences &the people I know personally- traders are gamblers by nature/habit/job (no offense intended) and this type of game is definitely a gamble of sorts. It would be fun to see the change in play too.

Remind me to tel you bout the time I was playing head up against a recently retired comodities trader in a cash game where I had Aces full of queens