Couple things for anyone interested for WSOPC:
2006 - 300+40
2011 - 300+45
2012 - 300+65 (I think this might have been also when they started including Dealer tip in buyin as well but not sure) - i remember that they didn't always do this and can't find structure sheet for 2011 but 2012 structure does list dealer fee included.

Also looks like 2014 is when the structure changed pretty significantly:
2012/13 - http://www.wsop.com/2012/circuit/201...5-RE-ENTRY.pdf

2014- http://www.wsop.com/2014/circuit/Structure_NLHE.pdf which appears to match the current structure for the 365 http://www.wsop.com/pdfs/structuresh...1286_15562.pdf

it's really hard to determine if these changes actually affect turnout.
If you can somehow come up with numbers year over year there isn't a sure fire way to tell if rake, structure, location of stops, economic markert of the stop, overall economy in general, number of stops on the WSOPC or just change in poker tournament interest in general was the actual cause.

These tournaments nowadays hurt the overall poker economy so much, even the fish. It's not just the rake increase, but the 8 level+ re-entry periods. Now instead of fish busting and going to the cash games, they re-enter and lose $730 80% of the time instead of $365 90% of the time. And they're probably not even going to lose $730 on average over 80% of the time in a 2/5 or lower cash game, so these tournaments end up being worse for the fish and the pros in terms of hourly win/lossrates.

And we know it's worse for the rooms hourly rate, as cash brings in way more rake than even the most successful tournament series. And yet tournaments are never going away because everyone (at times myself included) are a bunch of trophy coveting narcissists that want to show the world how they took down the big poker tournament just like one those guys on the teevee.

But isn't a rec donking off multiple buyins, inflating the prize pool with near dead money, ultimately good for the pros? Sure, it's more rake for the house and that's bad for the economy overall, but I've always felt that buying in late carries inherent disadvantages (in addition to the pure skill disadvantage one might already have going in). So maybe there's some recouped edge there.

my point exactly. at least in AC, pretty much every venue gives more bang for their buck tourney wise. maybe not at cherokee or at someplace the wsop goes to out in the sticks...but in the AC area they are way behind the curve.

Also keep in mind that while WSOPc starts you with fewer chips the blind structure tends to move along more conservatively than venues that start you with larger stacks. It's not simply the blinds starting at 25/50 vs 50/100. The ante ratio tends to get more aggressive earlier on with larger starting stacks. And WSOP also tends to extend the length of levels after the midway point while tournaments with larger starting stacks more often will have static length levels, turning the endgame effectively into a turbo.

If you can run up a stack early in the WSOPc events the structure starts to become your friend. On the other hand at Borgata style events the structure begins to mow you down if you can't get anything going early.

Everybody is lining up to waste their money on a long-shot bet paying short odds!!!
Pro players/semi pro's should form a union to have some sort of leverage against the greedy WSOP. If they would publicly declare their boycott(some are actually boycotting but who would know, I think maybe they fear being blackballed by the WSOP mafia?) and explain the math to the public amateurs/fellow pros/fish/fun players/writers/ and such, then those folks could have the opportunity to make the choice to also boycott excessive entry fee events. Until this happens the WSOP is gonna jack it up as long as the lines of "donators" are lining up to waste their money on a long-shot bet paying short odds!!!

Why are the pros-and semi pros not coming out to the public to try and fix this? It is they who are losing the most maoney. For example, the winner's prize in a game raped by an excess of 3-5% is probably losing $100k or $200k or more ,I don't have the math worked out on that one, but they are the ones getting their maney raped, so they should try and fis=x the situation, by conming out fearlessly and educating the other Pros/semi-pros/amatuers/fish/fun players/writers and such becaquse like one poster saqid alot of players never even notice the RAPE % and some don't even care and would probably line up to pay if the RAPE was set at 50%!!!

1) the poker union idea is still hilarious

2) explain the math to the public? the same public that buys lottery tickets, chase bad beat jackpot and pays 6:5 blackjack? if they cared about the math they'd stop playing poker bc they can't win in the long run. they like to gamble and like the idea of chasing a big prize. your interests don't align with their's.

I'd make 100% more effort to get out and play WSOPc if the tour pros weren't playing.

While they are at it, maybe they should also explain why it's highly -EV for them to play poker in the first place?

I'd definitely be willing to travel to tour stops if a significant number of pros would boycott it.

Exactly.

",Hey you know how you spend hundreds of dollars a day in Vegas ,play pit games and pay 60 dollars in rake for a tournament"


"Huh? Rake?"

"Well me and some other wastes of life trying to make a living playing 300 dollar tournaments are sick of it so we're gonna take our hoodies, sunglasses and tanking and sit them out until the rake is lowered. Wanna join us?

"So games will be easier and more fun and you're mad about 20 bucks? I'm gonna play."

Madlex it is true, you are correct, yet, i have known many who realized the -EV and have quit the game. And I also have witnessed many many others who will never realize this fact, and they keep showing up and donating.

But, your travel stops idea is off, I think. Suppose 2%-5% of the field was missing due to some pro/semi-pro drop-out, it's not gonna give you any better chance at a cash. The "-EV guys" can knock you out and/or you have still overpaid to play for a smaller prize(due to inflated rakes on entry fees) even if you survive to win. Just some quick math at a nearby WSOPC $300+65(17.8%). At 10% rake 1st place winner would have gotten $60,068 but at 17.8% he actually got about $4,400 less. $4,400 is enough to enter what? about 12 more $365 tournaments? And let's say this guy is what I refer to as semi-pro(the ones who have the most to lose, right? because they are the ones usually cashing, right) Multiply his reduced profit throughout his career.
NOW Borg23: How is this just $20???

Multiply all of these rakes and fees throughout a year and trying to come out ahead is a huger challenge than the huge challenge that it already is.

GREED point: The real WSOP took 10% on 1k and 1.5k tournaments, so they admit that $100 per player is a good profit to run the $1,000 event and even better $150 to run the $1,500 event. Why do they need $250 per player to run the $2,500 event? They don't. They just like get away with it. And they did.
Or how 'bout the Main Event at $600 per player, $6,000 per starting table to pay a dealer and a floor man? Some of the pro's (not just "semi's", but some of the "big boyz") are actually questioning why they charge any rake for the Main, as it is profitable even without any rake fees, it is huge on it's own, and supports all the other WSOP non-sense all over the country all year long!!!

Lmao@-ev players can knock you out too.

That does mean rec players aren't better off with less pros.


How many hours does the average player play in the main event?

I've also never played it but have heard from many people it's the softest tourny of the year.

The millionaire maker tournament collected rake of about $1,070,000.

The 1st hour of the millionaire maker tournament last year started of with about 7,100 players sitting at about 710 tables so that's about 710 dealers and let's say maybe another 70-100 floor men and support staff, so on hour-1 there is about 800 hours of labor cost.

Assume nobody is knocked out for 2 days of play at 12 hours per day and there would still be 7,100 players still alive after 24 hours of play!!!
That would require a total of about: 800 dealers/staff x 12 hrs per day x 2 days=19,200 man/labor hours.
Take the rake of $1.07 million and divide it by 19,200 hours = $55.73 per hour.
$55 per hour! Dealers are not paid this much, neither are most floor managers or cashiers or security personnel.

What if?, half the field of 7,100 survived to day 2 and were still alive at the end of day 2, it makes the labor hours reduce to about 14,400, that makes the hourly pay rate go up to $74 per hour.
Realistically. At the end of day 1 only 118 tables remained(118 dealers+50floor men and such).
and at the end of day 2 only 13 tables still playing(13 dealers+20floor men and such).
Now we are looking at far less employee hours used, estimate at about 7,000 hours to do the entire tournament( i think that may be a high estimate) given that they do want to pay the bills of space usage and electricity... say they cut out $250,000, or 1/4 of million dollars per day for that. It still leaves over $500,000 to pay people for 7,000 hours of labor, it comes out to over $71 per hour, nobody on that staff is paid $71 per hour.

So, $500,000 to "pay the bills" and another $300,000 not used to pay people for their labor, makes an outstanding profit for WSOP. And they can't even give you a $10 food voucher with your $1,500 buy in!!!

Not to account for inflated room rates and higher table minimums in the packed casino and packed slot machines with players and their family and friends, they really "rake" it in on this WSOP thing , maybe they could just be a bit less greedy.

One time I was discussing this mess with a writer for one the poker "rags" and he was suggesting that they, Harrahs/Ceasars are going broke on the WSOP, what a crock, I do not know who told him that, but it seems ridiculous.

Getting back to the origin of this thread, i think it's about WSOP Curcuit events with near over 20% buy-in rakes $300+$65, and they don't even have a Harrah's employee in the building, where these local yokel hillbilly TD'S try and run a big time tournament. And they expect to make about double the rake rate that the real WSOP makes.
These guys gotta make a profit, we all concede to that fact.
But they should consider the non-tournament income generated too(cash poker tables and slots and BJ and craps), and not just rape the poker tournament entry fees.

Satellites with big rakes? another pet peeve of mine.. Why do the rake so much on satellites? The money is going into the big games any way, why rake it at a double rate and essentially rake the same money twice, really almost nearly thrice? this is a "money grab" using a "double dipping" strategy.

We poker geeks are some of the most pathetically desperate gambling addicts in the Casino, paying more house percentage than even a lowly shameless Roulette player.

The room rates are not inflated. You earn reward credits on your buyin which can be exchanged for food. You also left out the cocktail servers and free waters and red bull and beer and crown royal etc. you also left out that the company is in business to make a profit for its shareholders not exist as an altruistic platform for poker players to earn a living.

Not to mention the building needs to be heated/air conditioned, lit, and maintained by a work staff. There's the advertising/promotion department.

To focus the cost of putting on a multi-table tournament on the dealers alone is some mighty bad economics.

I'm just going to assume this post is one big troll job because I'm shaking my head at the moment.

lots of brilliant ideas here. Here's mine.. 1 casino hosts a rec series for the summer. Rake it about 35% but include some goodies, medallions, buffet etc. Maybe everyone gets a mini trophy just for entering the main event. Winner gets a nice car with a trunk full of cash.

And I know a game that Pokerstars may come up with: Rake and go. It's fast, easy and fun. It's 0$+$100 because more rake is better. You show up, you pay the rake and you *** off; rake and go.

Yes, buffets and everybody gets a participation trophy and medallion. Who could possibly complain about 35% with a medallion around his neck, a full belly, and trophy in hand? Pure genius!

Most 1500s.

$1500+150+3% backend.

$1455+195

Circuit

$1500+175

Most $1ks

$1000+100+3% (some have $10 addon)

$960 or $970 plus $130/$140

Circuit

$1000+$125

Nice troll on the Bike tournament series. lol Maybe they should move it to summer ...

Which $1500s are you talking about? The WSOP and WSOP Circuit tournaments all have their dealer fees included in the rake, so there should be no "backend". Though the WSOP $1500s are actually $1350+$150.

it might be but what's more rediuclous is expecting them to lower the rake when they're getting 7100 people playing.it's basic supply and demand.

and out of these 7100 people how many are even good care about rake etc? how many more people would they get if they lowered the rake? not many, the ones they would get are more likely to take the money out of the poker economy anyway. even if they dropped the rake 20 pct and got 20 pct more people they make less money. they'd have to be even dumber than i thought to do something like that and i think cesar's is pretty ****ing dumb.

benny binion charged no rake and gave out rooms to wsop players bc it was basically a loss leader back then and they were sit and gos. if he had 7000 people willing to pay high rake on a wsop event he would have done it.

because people will pay it. this isn't rocket science.
you're not paying more of a house % than roulette. you can't beat roululette. you pay the juice bc you can beat poker. again not rocket science.if they house took 5 % but i could make money on the side somehow i'd ****ing play roulette if it was worth my time.you're just making the incredibly flawed online poker rake/world of warcraft argument. like you really expect them to set up these huge elaborate events filled with stone cold poker morons and take less than the roulette edge? might as well ask them for a bj while you're at it.