Thoughts on progressive/regressive blind intervals

[MrBo1011]

In all the tournaments I've hosted, played in, as well as all the suggested structures I've seen online, I don't think I've ever seen any where the blind intervals change... i.e. they are always constant from start to finish.

The main reasons I'm tinkering with trying something different are...
1) I like to allow plenty of time for deepstacked/high-M play, rather than things becoming a push-fold crapshoot after an hour or two.
2) Mathematically speaking, players are seeing and playing more hands in the mid-late stages. This may not be true in every tourney, but in a 1-table setup with 9-10 players it would seem logical given that fewer players = less players to act = more hands per level (especially if knocked-out players feel up for being full-time dealer ).
3) There is generally that inevitable "let's get this over with" feeling that starts to sink in after 3-4 hours when it's down to 2-3 players, and 20 minutes can seem more than enough for heads-up/short-handed play.

Here's an example of a deepstack setup that I may try at some point in the future for a Saturday/Sunday afternoon 1-table tournament...

T1500
5/10 (25 mins)
10/20 (25 mins)
15/30 (25 mins - 5 min break)
20/40 (20 mins)
25/50 (20 mins)
30/60 (20 mins)
40/80 (20 mins - 10 min break, color up)
50/100 (15 mins)
75/150 (15 mins)
100/200 (15 mins)
150/300 (10 mins)
... etc

Another option would be something even more specific and gradual... 30 mins, 28, 26, 24, 22... keep taking 2 min off per level, or start at 25 and -1 for each.

Anybody ever see/try something like this before? Any thoughts?

[DsquareD]

This is something my family struggles with. I have recently experimented with your second option and we like it. As players are eliminated, less time is needed. We have a few talkers early on that delay things. Even if a talker is still in late in the game they usually get more serious when they get in the money. Besides, the onlookers are also eager to get the next game going and urge things on with one dealing and one shuffling.

[BGinGA]

Originally Posted by MrBo1011

T1500
5/10 (25 mins)
10/20 (25 mins)
15/30 (25 mins - 5 min break)
20/40 (20 mins)
25/50 (20 mins)
30/60 (20 mins)
40/80 (20 mins - 10 min break, color up)
50/100 (15 mins)
75/150 (15 mins)
100/200 (15 mins)
150/300 (10 mins)
... etc

Another option would be something even more specific and gradual... 30 mins, 28, 26, 24, 22... keep taking 2 min off per level, or start at 25 and -1 for each.

Anybody ever see/try something like this before? Any thoughts?

I have blind structures that do it both ways -- 25 minutes down to 10 minutes in 5-minute increments every few rounds, and another that drops it from the starting value by 2 minutes per level (or every two levels) for the duration of the event.

The objective is to keep the number of hands played per blind level constant during the entire tournament. Fewer players = more hands played per time unit, so less time is required in the later stages of the event to equal the number of hands played during the earlier levels. For this reason, a linear progression is not as good, since the field typically doesn't start thinning out until after several levels have been played. All of those early rounds should have the same length, since they typically all have the same number of players (and hands/hour rate).

There is some discussion and examples of this in the CT forums (check the blind structures section).

[Captn_All_In]

I had always run my tournaments the way you were describing. I kept the blinds going up but after the second break the time limit dropped from 30 min to 20 min, or 20 min to 15. It occasionally turned things into a crap shoot, but more often than not it just helped lead to the eventual outcome and allowed more time for guys to get into the cash game if they were interested. One thing you should do before you try this out is ask your players and get a feel early in a tournament to see how they react... then do what you want to do, but at least you ask them about it first.

[MrBo1011]

Thanks for all the feedback guys... relatively new to the forums and have had nothing but warm welcomes so far. Even got to meet some other CTers in person at a home game the other night - all very nice gents - and I'm looking forward to burning up plenty more hours perusing all the chip pr0n here and fantasizing about my next set.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought of this blind structure, though BG, I couldn't find any previous threads on this in any of the forums, or anywhere else online for that matter, which gave me the feeling that it was just another crazy idea of mine.

To the Captn, would you suggest trying the more gradual decline to avoid that eventual panic mode that players seem to go into when you drop it by 5-10 minutes? Also, I personally always like to clarify the blind structure, rebuy procedures, and payouts as much as possible when hosting a game. There's nothing worse than buying in under the assumption that it'll be a reasonable structure and later realizing that within an hour you'll have an M of 5 if you don't double up quick and only 6% get paid... even some casinos seem to go out of their way to hide this information from players.

Anyways, I'll give something like what I posted above a shot at my next tourney and will let you all know how it goes.

[JD Roark]

A lot of players prefer having more hands per level at the end because that is where the money is. They prefer to have more time when each elimination means more. In my experience, the "let's get it over with" sentiment comes more from the players that have been eliminated than the players actually playing. And if the players want to get it in and get it over with, they can do that through agressive play without the blind structure speeding up.

That being said, if your group prefers it to speed up, then its the right structure for you.

[Captn_All_In]

Bo, I understand the gradual decrease, but I think that it would be easier to sell to your players if you say that the time drops after each break. I also understand JD's feelings that players who are out usually are the ones giving the pressure. I say try it one time and see how it feels for you, if you or the players don't like it tweak it for next time.

[MrBo1011]

Good points, and JD, that thought had crossed my mind as well. I think the thing some of us were assuming is that, generally speaking, you can see the same number of hands in less time during later stages. For instance, it may take 25 minutes to see 15 hands when 10-handed, but only 15-20 minutes or so to see the same number of hands when 3 or 4 handed, especially considering the hands at this point where a flop is actually seen.

So I guess the question is...
1) In the ideal tournament, the number of hands per level... A) is relatively constant, B) increases, C) decreases, or D) none of the above? (is it obvious that I teach high school?)

And then...
2) Based on your answer to #1, how do you achieve that?

Also hard to answer to given situations when you have about 12-14 players and start with 2 tables 6-7-handed, then 9-10-handed in mid-stages, etc.

[Krafticus]

I think it comes down to a few factors.

Number of players / tables for example. My last event had 33 runners, so 4 tables were used. We started at 3 tables of 8, and 1 of 9. after 3 to 4 people are out, you are at roughly 4 tables of 7, which isn't too bad. I always combine my tables in multiples of 9 (so, at 9, 18, and 27).

Now, once at 3 tables, and blinds still relatively low, hands per level stays pretty consistant. People start busting out, and will eventually will have 2 tables with 6 and 1 with 7. Hands per orbit will go up. Once combined, we're back up to a full 9 per table.

Soooo, what I'm getting at it is that I don't think speeding up the blinds helps much in tournaments with a greater number of players. In my case, it actually hinders the players a little, as they will see fewer hands per level now, rushing them into push/fold category.

--- Sorry, now I re-read your post .. and you mention a 1-table tournament... so ^^ doesn't really apply.

Yeah, for a 1 table event, I would think you could decrease the level times after each break by 5 minutes.

It is one of my pet peeves though, that players late in a tournament get "tired of playing", and just want to get it over with. I came to play cards, I came to win the event, and I will never give up because "its late, and I'm tired" I don't like tournaments with super-aggresive blinds and low starting chip stacks, as I don't belive people can play their best poker. I also don't like super slow blind structures that barely move, and pots stay relatively small. That being said, I think you need to find the perfect mix of time wanted to play and blind increments to keep the game moving.

Ok, I think I'm just rambling now...

Back to work for now.

Mark

[BGinGA]

1. A

2. Set each blind round length to the appropriate time for the average table-size (rounded down to the nearest whole number).


The shorthand version looks like this:
7-9 players per table - 20 minutes
4-6 players per table - 15 minutes
2-3 players per table - 10 minutes
(* see last two paragraphs for how these values were calculated)


For example, our tournaments are two tables (18 players max). Tables combine when down to 9 players, so each table size ranges between 5-9 players before combining. Blind levels will never be shorter than 15 minutes until the final table reaches three-handed play.

Rounds start at 20 minutes, and the round length is based on the average number of players per table at the start of the round (9.0 in our case, at the start of the tourney) - so the baseline hands per round at the start of the tournament is 9. We try to keep it close to this level for the duration of the event.

If R2 starts with an average table size (ATS) of 9, then the round remains 20 minutes long. In fact, the round time doesn't drop until the ATS = 6, so five players must be eliminated before the blind round length changes:
ATS = (18-5)/2 = 6.5 = 6, rounded down.
It will stay at 15 minutes until a total of nine players have been eliminated, at which time tables combine into one and the round time goes back up to 20 minutes, dropping to 15 minutes with 6 players left, and down to 10 minutes when it reaches 3-handed play until the end of the event.

In reality, if you always keep the tables balanced and just track the number of remaining players, it's pretty easy to determine how long the blind round should be at any given point. You could get more granular and shorten the rounds incrementally for 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 players, but the 5-minute increments seem to work pretty well for our group.

In fact, we have played so many tournaments using the same structure that it's pretty well-defined when players will be eliminated and when the tables will combine (on average), so that all of our blind level times are pre-determined (with appropriate time decreases and increases based on projected average table sizes). Even when it's off, it's not off by much or for very long.


* Our dedicated dealers average 27 hands per hour at a full table (9 players). For 3 players, the dealers average about 54 hands per hour. One could assume that dealers average about 40 hands per hour for 6 players.

If the starting round is 20 minutes, that works out to 9 hands per round. When the table size is 6, then 9 hands per round works out to 15 minutes of blind time. When three-handed, 9 hands per hour is 10 minutes of blind time. YMMV.

.