The Allen "Chainsaw" Kessler Absurdity Containment Thread - Page 6 - MTT Community

BJ Nemeth · 11-25-2009, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublejoker

I posted this same poll on another forum without the names of the events listed so as not to bias the responses in any way.

When I did my analysis, I was working with data from Dan Michalski that was just listed as Tournament A, Tournament B, and Tournament C. When I finished my analysis for him, I figured out which was which so I could post in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vicious Vinny

Pretty clear to me that the Venetian's structure is the worst of the 3 even with 90 minute levels....kinda curious as to why BJ chose that event over the other two...

Are you kidding? 90-minute levels are 50% longer than 60-minute levels. That's HUGE! For every two levels that you play at 90 minutes, the other tournament is playing three at 60 minutes -- it's like getting an extra level every three hours!

If you want to compare 60-minute and 90-minute blind structures more directly (all other things being equal), then delete every third level from the tournament with 60-minute levels, starting with level 2. (Delete levels 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, etc.)

By comparison, increasing the levels from 60 minutes to 70 minutes is only a 16.67% increase. You'll need to play 7 hours before you get an extra level compared to a straight 60-minute structure. That's a relatively minor change. (An increase from 60 to 75 minutes would be a 25% increase, with an extra level every 5 levels.)

Kramerica · 11-25-2009, 02:47 AM

one of my favorite moments on the tour was watching chainsaw lose AA to A10o all in pre, truly a lovely experience I will tell my children about

BJ Nemeth · 11-25-2009, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJ Nemeth

By comparison, increasing the levels from 60 minutes to 70 minutes is only a 16.67% increase. You'll need to play 7 hours before you get an extra level compared to a straight 60-minute structure. That's a relatively minor change. (An increase from 60 to 75 minutes would be a 25% increase, with an extra level every 5 levels.)

Minor error in that last line. It should say, "An increase from 60 to 75 minutes would be a 25% increase, with an extra level every 5 hours."

My bad.

doublejoker · 11-25-2009, 03:09 PM

It is clear that the masses do not want less starting chips, early bustouts, and short levels.

Jurollo · 11-25-2009, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublejoker

It is clear that the masses do not want less starting chips, early bustouts, and short levels.

By "the masses" you mean 50-75 or so 2+2ers who may or may not play live?

doublejoker · 11-25-2009, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurollo

By "the masses" you mean 50-75 or so 2+2ers who may or may not play live?

No, I spoke with several players in AC this past week who chose the Borgata/Taj Combo over the LA Open main event.

The starting chip stack, structure and length of levels all went into their decision process.

BJ Nemeth · 11-25-2009, 03:45 PM

As Jurollo pointed out earlier, there are different markets for different events, and both are valid for their respective markets.

Matt Savage's tournaments tend to favor (and attract) the top professional players who want a meaningful Day 1 (with plenty of bustouts), and want a lot of play late in the tournament. Other tournaments offer a larger starting stack, which is much easier to advertise and tends to attract more mid-level and casual players.

In my experience, deep stacks on Day 1 don't seem to have much impact on who finishes in the big-money spots (1st, 2nd, and 3rd). My personal opinion is that a championship-level event should have a structure that offers more play when it matters -- late in the tournament.

doublejoker · 11-25-2009, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJ Nemeth

As Jurollo pointed out earlier, there are different markets for different events, and both are valid for their respective markets.

Matt Savage's tournaments tend to favor (and attract) the top professional players who want a meaningful Day 1 (with plenty of bustouts), and want a lot of play late in the tournament. Other tournaments offer a larger starting stack, which is much easier to advertise and tends to attract more mid-level and casual players.

In my experience, deep stacks on Day 1 don't seem to have much impact on who finishes in the big-money spots (1st, 2nd, and 3rd). My personal opinion is that a championship-level event should have a structure that offers more play when it matters -- late in the tournament.

I agree BJ but there are limits to what you say. I still don't believe that top pros as you call them prefer a structure where half the field is gone in five 1 hour levels in a main event costing over $2,000.

There is simply too much variance early. I really liked the suggestion (even though joking) that the person made to add a 75-150 level to the commerce main event structures.

Gydyon · 11-25-2009, 03:55 PM

How is several the masses again?

BJ Nemeth · 11-25-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublejoker

There is simply too much variance early.

Many people (myself included) would argue that usually, there is simply too much variance late.

You need to decide which is more important to you.

**Matt Savage** · 11-25-2009, 04:01 PM

Allen "Spokesman for the Masses" Kessler sounds like a good moniker!

Your poll question is flawed by just giving chips and buy-ins BTW!

All three of the tournament in your poll have great structures and that is not in question so get over it.

Please avoid the LA Poker Classic if you are going to nit me everyday for more chips, longer levels, and buffet comps!

Jurollo · 11-25-2009, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublejoker

I agree BJ but there are limits to what you say. I still don't believe that top pros as you call them prefer a structure where half the field is gone in five 1 hour levels in a main event costing over $2,000.

There is simply too much variance early. I really liked the suggestion (even though joking) that the person made to add a 75-150 level to the commerce main event structures.

There is something called hourly dude. You're ridiculous. In fact, I think you project the complete antithesis to what a perfect structure is. Realistically a structure should start shallow (relatively) and either get deeper as the late stages occur, or attempt to remain stagnant depth wise all the way through. Its funny, because if a TD made a tournament based on avg stack and not on set blind lengths. The structure started 50bb's deep and then kept the blinds at 50bb's the entire tournament. Upping blinds based on KO's. This would be an amazing structure which would allow for loads of play, however, people like Allen would bitch that it wouldn't play deep enough, too much variance.

**Matt Savage** · 11-25-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurollo

There is something called hourly dude. You're ridiculous. In fact, I think you project the complete antithesis to what a perfect structure is. Realistically a structure should start shallow (relatively) and either get deeper as the late stages occur, or attempt to remain stagnant depth wise all the way through. Its funny, because if a TD made a tournament based on avg stack and not on set blind lengths. The structure started 50bb's deep and then kept the blinds at 50bb's the entire tournament. Upping blinds based on KO's. This would be an amazing structure which would allow for loads of play, however, people like Allen would bitch that it wouldn't play deep enough, too much variance.

Thank You JRollo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you look we went to 49 BB's only twice in the tournament which in my opinion is ideal and we were between 49-70 BB's the majority of the tournament!

I asked my man Sam what about a structure that started at 50 BB's deep and went up whenever we got to 60 BB's and he said that is about what we have already.

But of course the "Masses" have spoken!

doublejoker · 11-25-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Savage

Allen "Spokesman for the Masses" Kessler sounds like a good moniker!

Your poll question is flawed by just giving chips and buy-ins BTW!

All three of the tournament in your poll have great structures and that is not in question so get over it.

Please avoid the LA Poker Classic if you are going to nit me everyday for more chips, longer levels, and buffet comps!

There wasn't enough room in the poll to list everything.

You know im gonna be there playing. I will adjust to whatever you offer. I hope it is OK with you to offer suggestions. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think my last cash was in one of your events!

Bonified · 11-25-2009, 04:30 PM

If half the field was gone within the first 5 hours in more live tournaments, I'd play a lot more of them. Lots of people donking them off early on and more play later on because the field is reduced and so the average stack is higher. What's not to like ?

It would also have been quite difficult to find anyone in AC who decided to play LA and not AC irrespective of structures. DUCY ?