CarbonPoker.ag Tournament Improvement Thread - Page 11 - Carbon Poker

paul rizzo · 10-21-2011, 12:03 AM

Merge decides to go ahead and make changes to the super turbos and they add $1.06 supers and lower the rake on the $2s, seriously?

Out of all the SNG's Merge must make the most profit by far off the super turbos specifically $5+, because they run so much more than the others and they avg 6 minutes with the insanely fast structure. So instead of helping theplayers that grind these everry day they add in a few popcorn stake supers and lower the rake on them, then don't help the bigger games which actually make Merge decent money.

It's truly absurd to have the same effective rake at the $1s and the $5s. My preferance would be not lowering the rake but adding in a t50 level and maybe one other. My theory is that recreational players don't like starting a tournament with 10 bbs. They think 'it's not poker'. I believe that if they started with 20 bbs more recreational players would play them and then more people would grind them. I think it would be pretty smart of Merge.

**CarbonChris** · 10-21-2011, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyson219

Chris,

Hand for hand at Final Table bubbles is weird. Hand for hand stops once 9 players remain. However, the final two tables do not merge until both tables have played a hand. If one hand is taking a long time at one of the tables, the other table has, at times, played upto 5-6 hands. The hand for hand should remain in effect until the tables have merged.

Hope this makes sense. If not, I'll explain in more detail.

Our developers have looked into this and can't seem to replicate the issue or find any examples. Would you be able to let us know if this happens again and send us a screenshot and/or some hand numbers?

Thanks.

vanisher_2+2 · 10-21-2011, 01:21 AM

Erm... what happened to the 2.20/45? They were the only 45s that ran a decent amount. Also, now only the 5.50/45 shows up in the Tournaments tab and the 11/45 doesn't?

Rusemandingo · 10-21-2011, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul rizzo

Merge decides to go ahead and make changes to the super turbos and they add $1.06 supers and lower the rake on the $2s, seriously?

Out of all the SNG's Merge must make the most profit by far off the super turbos specifically $5+, because they run so much more than the others and they avg 6 minutes with the insanely fast structure. So instead of helping theplayers that grind these everry day they add in a few popcorn stake supers and lower the rake on them, then don't help the bigger games which actually make Merge decent money.

It's truly absurd to have the same effective rake at the $1s and the $5s. My preferance would be not lowering the rake but adding in a t50 level and maybe one other. My theory is that recreational players don't like starting a tournament with 10 bbs. They think 'it's not poker'. I believe that if they started with 20 bbs more recreational players would play them and then more people would grind them. I think it would be pretty smart of Merge.

I agree with most of this but not the t50 level. Super turbos are pretty much pushfold. Adding a level with steal/resteal stacks would really change the games up a bunch (and make it harder for people like me who suck at anything but p/f).

Chris you guys really need to do something about this. The majority of the SNG traffic and rake comes from the 5s-35s and while youve lowerd the rake on games below and added levels to the game above, youve left these main games alone. I dont know if that was by design or what but its a big slap in the face to some of your networks largest rakers. And i know lower rake is better than higher rake, but you guys really should have just raised the rake at 1s instead of dropping it at the 10s. It extremely pisses me off that i pay the same rake % at a 5 as someone playing a game 1/5 the buyin.

jdawg91 · 10-21-2011, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rusemandingo

I agree with most of this but not the t50 level. Super turbos are pretty much pushfold. Adding a level with steal/resteal stacks would really change the games up a bunch (and make it harder for people like me who suck at anything but p/f).

Chris you guys really need to do something about this. The majority of the SNG traffic and rake comes from the 5s-35s and while youve lowerd the rake on games below and added levels to the game above, youve left these main games alone. I dont know if that was by design or what but its a big slap in the face to some of your networks largest rakers. And i know lower rake is better than higher rake, but you guys really should have just raised the rake at 1s instead of dropping it at the 10s. It extremely pisses me off that i pay the same rake % at a 5 as someone playing a game 1/5 the buyin.

+1

Rusemandingo · 10-21-2011, 05:52 PM

Quote:

but you guys really should have just raised the rake at 1s instead of dropping it at the 2s.

fmp

tyson219 · 10-21-2011, 08:32 PM

As mentioned in earlier posts, an entire overhaul of the blind system would be great. In the interim, some of the tournaments are missing important blinds levels that exist in most of the MTTs on the site.

The two most common missing levels are:
250/500/50 (for example, in the $33 6.5k gtd at 19:15
1250/2500/250 (for example, in the High Roller at 20:00, 100 1 rebuy 1 addon at 18:00, 40 1 rebuy 1 addon at 18:45).

These levels are missing in a number of other tournaments as well, but these are the ones I notice immediately.

Max Cut · 10-22-2011, 01:49 PM

More suggestions for 6-max super-turbo STTs.

The 10-cent supers are always running like mad compared to the other levels. Adding the $1 supers should help entice some of the 10-cent players to migrate up, but it's still a relatively big jump. I suggest looking at methods to facilitate that migration rather than hinder it. For example, add a 25-cent level, or 50-cent, or both.

Rather than limiting the number of levels in an attempt to get more games going at higher levels, I say offer more options to let people play they level they are comfortable with. Those that do well are likely to move up. Those that don't are more like to stay at their current level longer before dropping down or leaving.

I also agree with previous posters that the rake might need a little tweaking. And of course, I add another call for 300/600 in all the supers (wouldn't mind seeing the 1500 starting stack as well).

Keep $0.10 supers at $0.10+$0.01 (10% rake)
Add $0.25 supers at $0.25+$0.02 (8% rake)
Move $1 supers to $1.00+$0.07 (7% rake)
Keep $2 supers at $2.00+$0.12 (6% rake)
Lower $5 supers to $5.00+$0.25 (5% rake)
Lower $10 supers to $10+$0.45 (4.5% rake)

jdawg91 · 10-22-2011, 01:53 PM

For the love of god no, we don't need more micro levels. $5s and $10s run faster than the $1s and $2s right now and $1s load slower than $2s

suchsickaments · 10-22-2011, 08:22 PM

Why are these payouts so different? These are the lobbies from the 100$ 1r1a from Friday and Saturday. One of them has more people and a bigger prize pool and the payouts for first place are a ton different. Why are the payouts so different from day to day?

IBGrindin · 10-23-2011, 04:56 PM

noticed some bounty tournaments now have guaranteeds on them like the $16.50 at 16:30 but its only $750. Why not make it at least 1.5K to start, it will meet it.

**CarbonChris** · 10-24-2011, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyson219

As mentioned in earlier posts, an entire overhaul of the blind system would be great. In the interim, some of the tournaments are missing important blinds levels that exist in most of the MTTs on the site.

The two most common missing levels are:
250/500/50 (for example, in the $33 6.5k gtd at 19:15
1250/2500/250 (for example, in the High Roller at 20:00, 100 1 rebuy 1 addon at 18:00, 40 1 rebuy 1 addon at 18:45).

These levels are missing in a number of other tournaments as well, but these are the ones I notice immediately.

Thanks for the input. I think there certainly are some changes that can come with the blind structure, but that's going to take some time. But if there's glaring omissions right now, that's something we're definitely open to having a look at.

**CarbonChris** · 10-24-2011, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Max Cut

More suggestions for 6-max super-turbo STTs.

The 10-cent supers are always running like mad compared to the other levels. Adding the $1 supers should help entice some of the 10-cent players to migrate up, but it's still a relatively big jump. I suggest looking at methods to facilitate that migration rather than hinder it. For example, add a 25-cent level, or 50-cent, or both.

Rather than limiting the number of levels in an attempt to get more games going at higher levels, I say offer more options to let people play they level they are comfortable with. Those that do well are likely to move up. Those that don't are more like to stay at their current level longer before dropping down or leaving.

I also agree with previous posters that the rake might need a little tweaking. And of course, I add another call for 300/600 in all the supers (wouldn't mind seeing the 1500 starting stack as well).

Keep $0.10 supers at $0.10+$0.01 (10% rake)
Add $0.25 supers at $0.25+$0.02 (8% rake)
Move $1 supers to $1.00+$0.07 (7% rake)
Keep $2 supers at $2.00+$0.12 (6% rake)
Lower $5 supers to $5.00+$0.25 (5% rake)
Lower $10 supers to $10+$0.45 (4.5% rake)

I think adding the $1 is a step in this direction. We need to take a little bit of time to see how that addition effects the games around it. But we're always looking to expand the options, so we'll see what happens in the coming weeks.

**CarbonChris** · 10-24-2011, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IBGrindin

noticed some bounty tournaments now have guaranteeds on them like the $16.50 at 16:30 but its only $750. Why not make it at least 1.5K to start, it will meet it.

This will likely come with time. We'll be looking at all guarantees to see if they need adjusting. In some cases, especially with a brand new guarantee, we just need a little time to see how the numbers look.

jdawg91 · 10-24-2011, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarbonChris

This will likely come with time. We'll be looking at all guarantees to see if they need adjusting. In some cases, especially with a brand new guarantee, we just need a little time to see how the numbers look.

Yea exactly this, I think I offered up the $750 guarantee on it myself just to gauge how well it'd do....seems to be doing well which is great

Keep it up Chris, appreciate the work you put in