wondering what everyone's thoughts were regarding the WSOP marathon event... didn't get to play this year to schedule conflicts.

structure is obviously slow and deep, but wondering if people are finding that they don't like it as much as they thought they would? was it too slow?

how is the player pool level? tough/soft field? i expect there to be less recreational players given that the tournament was on like a Monday.

overall thoughts?

they should rebrand it as the mini main event (possibly replacing monster stack depending on schedule etc)

$2500 buyin, 25k starting stack (with 75/150/25 first level), 75 minute levels day 1/2, 90 min day 3+

Uhh no. The Monster stack is the mini-main event now, 6800 average field the last 2 years and in only 2 flights per year. It's the biggest freezeout tourney other than the Main. If it ain't broke, don't try to fix it.

Agreed. Monster stack is a tad too long on day 1 as it is. Making it an even longer tourney would make it worse. No thank you. If they want to use another weekend for marathon, then by all means, be my guest.

And hopefully they'll return the monster stack to the more successful fri/sat schedule next year.

I liked the structure, I made the $$, but TBH, just too many pros. Maybe I was unlucky, but of all the tables I played, i don't remember a single recreational player.

thanks for the feedback regarding actual play type. was more curious about that type of stuff and how much you enjoyed the structure. obv know the structure as it is listed on the site.

i was wondering if it would be more pro heavy or rec heavy.

on one hand, it is on a monday and so most recs cant just be playing some Day 1 event on a monday.

but thought it might attract more recs because it has the long slow structure and is like a "min main event"

Recs don't like the Main Event because it has a long slow structure. They like it because it is the most prestigious poker tournament in the world and you can win millions of dollars and become an instant celebrity if the stars align. Any other event which is so ridiculously long would draw very few players.

IMO, long/slow structures are for the birds. Life is too short. Who the heck has time to be spending days playing a poker tournament before one even has a sniff at making money? If I could play only one tournament each year, then maybe something long and slow would make sense, if the scheduling worked. But there are lots of different options available throughout the year and during summer for both pros and recs alike. There's no good reason to make such a big time investment into one tourney.

I had a lot of recs at my tables. I think you project a lot akashenk. You have posted that you don't like long slow structures and that you skip early levels often. I think that is not the common view of recs. I would bet large $$ that in basically every tourney if you polled the recs they would vote overwhelmingly to have more chips and longer levels. I have heard 1000s of times people bitching about "blinds getting too big", "just a donkey shovefest now", etc etc. I have heard literally 0 times anyone saying "man this sucks we are all 70bb deep".

Well, I am definitely not a typical rec, at least as I have defined the term. And I think everybody basically projects their own opinion. However, I like to think I make my opinion based on logical arguments... not just what is best for me personally.

There is a big difference between a long/slow structure and a donkey shove-fest. There is a happy medium which can be achieved, and which is being ignored, particularly at the WSOP.

Yes, if you polled most recs (ie players who do not have the time, wherewithal, interest, etc. to play for a living), they would say they prefer more starting chips. This is because they feel they get more play early in tournaments with more starting chips. And more starting chips are a bit of a safety net. They are right.

Of course starting stacks are not the only, and certainly not the most important, factor when it comes to how "good" a structure is. Blind lengths, and escalation are the key. And yes, if you asked a typical rec if they prefer longer or shorter levels, they would probably say longer. However, if you asked a typical rec, would they prefer to reach the money in one day or almost two days, I think the answer would be very different.

"Pros" love long/slow structures because they want more time to apply their skill advantage. Ok, I can buy that. However, what many forget is it is the relative skill that matters. So, if you are playing against better competition, it doesn't matter how long you have, you are doing something less profitable. I also think most players over-estimate their skill advantage, but I suppose that is a separate conversation.

Anyhow, IMO, pros of all skill levels should be willing to give up a little when it comes to structure in order to gain more when it comes to rec-friendlier formats.

A tourney which starts with 15-25K in chips and has 40-45 minute day 1 levels (instead of the hour+ levels you see at the WSOP and some other events throughout Vegas) and follows the typical "Chainsaw-approved" level progression is in no way a turbo/shove-fest. It just isn't. It gives players of all skill levels plenty of play. And while such a tourney will rarely make the money day 1, it certainly shouldn't take more than a few hours to do so on day 2, particularly if its paying more than 10%. Add to that Fri/Sat day 1s (and some big guarantees, if the venue offers them), and you have a formula which I believe is very attractive to rec players, and should therefore be very attractive to pros.

I disagree. What you think is a good structure I think is crap. I am a rec player looking to play 5 to 8 good quality events over the summer.

I thought the Marathon was awesome! I won't play the standard $1500 WSOP full table because structure too fast.

Obviously we have different opinions. I think the right approach is to offer a variety of structures. I don't mind if they have a couple turbo's (which I have no interest in playing), but would prefer to see a $5k with 100 minutes (i.e. the Marathon), and a $2500 with 90 minute levels.

Bottom line, for me Marathon by far best event of summer other than WSOP main event.

+1

As a mid-stakes player grinding out 20k-50k/year as a part-time job... I will never be bankrolled for the Main Event.

However, I would love to be able to come out and play the $2500 marathon and/or the monster stack for similar experiences.

I don't have anything against the existence of the Marathon event. And I think there are 5-8 good quality events throughout the summer (especially in the vicinity of the 1500 pricepoint). Its just almost all of them are not at the WSOP.

Exactly. One thing I have never heard at a table "man this tourney just plays too deep, wish we had less time/chips."

It went from 6927 to 6716. The $1500 bounty tournament retained the same Monday first day and also declined from 2150 to 1927. The Millionaire Maker moved from a Friday start to a Saturday start and increased its field from 7190 to 7761. The Crazy 8s moved from Friday to Saturday and increased from 6761 to 8120.

Does this mean that the Monster Stack would have declined more if it had started on Friday? Does it mean that it just draws a different demographic than those other tournaments? If it's the latter, perhaps it is just close enough that the WSOP organizers are indifferent to starting on Friday or Saturday, so that their choice of start date will depend on criteria other than projected field size.

I didn't track the others but the MM had significantly fewer unique entries this year. I think they banked on people re-buying more, which they did. That couldn't happen in the MS as it is a freeze-out tourney. It would do better Fri/Sat.

Where was this information reported?

These posts. You'll have to check with the authors for their sources.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=857

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=865