[TC Valdez]

One of the guys we play poker with proposed the following:

buy-in: $20

Blinds: .25/.50

Here's the kicker: Play until one person has it all (got the idea from Rounders). No re-buys no cash out until the end.

It's like a tournament where it's winner-takes-all with no increase in blinds.

Has anyone ever tried this before? And if so what were the pros and cons.

I know that it will be a very long game. Not very many loose players in our games.

Appreciate all input.

Thanks
TC

[hachkc]

Its called a freezeout though I haven't played one in a long time. Personally, a tournament is better or incrementally raising the blinds after every bustout or every 2 bustouts. Otherwise you end up waiting for 2 big hands to collide.

[links_slayer]

My Humble Opinion: L-A-M-E

With the blinds never increasing this becomes very boring very quickly, especially if you have to wait until someone busts out. We used to play this way in high school. It seemed to take an eternity to end also. Although raising the blinds after every bust-out (as suggested) will make things quicker it's still painful. One of the guys I work with INSISTS on playing this way - raising the blinds only after someone goes broke. It's not fun IMO. The blinds could remain the same for an hour or two. If I didn't enjoy the company of those guys so much, I wouldn't think twice about kindly declining his invite.

[Big Mike]

It's great if you're the best player - never any pressure by the blinds to loosen up.
This would work fine if you were playing heads up - like Rounders. For a whole table, I would see it as being boring, and probably wouldn't end in one night.

[Clipper]

THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR . . . This format is called a cash-out tournament. They are rare; I once played in one in a casino in Washington state. You use cash-value chips (If the buyin is $50, you get $50 in actual cash game chips). Say if there were 50 players, you would play until you get down to the last 5 players (whatever % of people you choose actually). Here is the kicker. Nobody can cash out until you get to the last 5 players. The short stack has the option to cash-out between hands. The stipulation is that you have to post your blinds, then the short stack can cash out. The other players can't cash out. After each hand, the short stack (after playing blinds) has the option to cash out.

This format encourages players to win all of the chips. It does little good to get blinded off but to squeak into 3rd or 4th place just by surviving. Another thing, there are no deals (other than informal agreements to split profits).

[Clipper]

The beauty of the cashout tourney is that chips retain their intrinsic cash value - dollar for dollar - whereas in a regular tourney payout structure, the winner wins all of the chips, but only a fraction of the money. Some (Mike Cairo especially) feel this is an unfair aspect of poker tourneys.

[Clipper]

One more thing about the cashout tourney. You have increasing blinds and fixed length rounds, just like a regular tourney.

[jbaclian]

Originally Posted by links_slayer

My Humble Opinion: L-A-M-E

With the blinds never increasing this becomes very boring very quickly, especially if you have to wait until someone busts out. We used to play this way in high school. It seemed to take an eternity to end also. Although raising the blinds after every bust-out (as suggested) will make things quicker it's still painful. One of the guys I work with INSISTS on playing this way - raising the blinds only after someone goes broke. It's not fun IMO. The blinds could remain the same for an hour or two. If I didn't enjoy the company of those guys so much, I wouldn't think twice about kindly declining his invite.

Ugh, I used to play with some of the big wigs at my company and they all played like this...using a ratty old case filled with a random mix of dice/suited/pogs (yes pogs, from like 1993) as chips. All chips were valued at 1. and your starting chip stack was determined by how many people were playing that night.

Just about the grossest form of a tournament I've ever played.

[MeridianFC]

Originally Posted by Big Mike

It's great if you're the best player - never any pressure by the blinds to loosen up.
This would work fine if you were playing heads up - like Rounders. For a whole table, I would see it as being boring, and probably wouldn't end in one night.

I agree with this.