Im sorry but id like to think most people would agree that wsop and wsopc starting stacks are weak.
Most events i play at foxwoods or.borgata
Give you 20k to 30k starting stacks.excluding the new trendy 100k stacks.
Seriously a 365$ in wsopc gets u a measly 10k stack
You lose one big hand bad beat etc and your toast.

The wsop needs to restructure there events
Players want more starting chips not 2 hour levels

30k 30 min levels is perfect

Yes in 10k events should be longer levels maybe a hour
No one needs to play 25/50 for 2 hours lol

My first trip 3 years ago played 1k plo event
Thanks for the 3k starting stack.what a joke
The only highlight was mike matasow was at the table and he was a pleasure to play with made for quite a fun time.well.until.my 3k ran out lol

Then following year they give u 7500 starting stack for 1500$ wtf?

Seriously someone try to prove me.wrong?

I luv you wsop please catch up to the times and what players want.

I know it is ty

lol I believed that only French people understood nothing at the depths of stacks but apparently some Americans either.... We don't care about the number of chips, you have to consider BB depth, level durations....... I prefer 10k on 25/50 blinds with 1 hour level than 50k on 250/500 with 20 min level, don't you ?

Who wants to play for 3 days and miss money cause of unnecessary long levels.

I prefer 20 to 30k starting stack 20 to.30 min levels
1 to 2 day long events is all you need.

Seriously you think its cool for wsop to give you a lousy 7500 starting stack on $1500 buyin? Its like a slap in face

Unlimited rebuys also ruined the game

Id rather see maybe one rentry per day

If you don't like the starting stack, then don't play...it really IS about that simple. A lot of people playing the smaller buy-in events are there for the 'experience' and being able to say they played in the WSOP.

Very few of the events run three days with people missing out on making the money. Indeed, many of those smaller buy-in events tend to be in the money on day 2.

Turbo-type formats are NOT good for the game, and that is precisely what the 20 minute levels create.

I agree that unlimited re-buys are a concern but would not concur that they have 'ruined' the game. I have not played enough events year over year that went from either a freeze-out format or only one re-entry and then became an unlimited re-buy to discern whether there are really that many more bullets being fired.

^ is a pretty solid post.

IMO, the structures you see at the mid to high buy-ins at the Venetian, Wynn, PH, etc are better than what you see at the WSOP. Are they as deep? No. But they are more rec-friendly, and therefore, pros should be advocating more for them. Having the deepest structure possible, if it is not attractive to rec players, is detrimental to pro players.

As a rec player myself, the ideal structure for NLH is something like the following...

Starting chips should be 20-25K. Day 1 levels should be no more/less than 40-45 minutes long. Level lengths should increase to 50-60 minutes for day 2, and be no greater than 70 minutes at any point in the tourney. "Chainsaw-approved" levels can be used for the higher buy-in tourneys, or those expected to last more than 2 days to completion, and faster level structures can be implemented for those tourneys that need to complete in 2 days, or 1 day. If need be, these tourneys can start at 50-100 or 100-100, to speed things up and get in the money faster. No tourney, outside of a few special events, or those geared towards pros, should be scheduled to last more than 3 days.

This sort of structure provide a sufficient amount of play both early and late and makes sure the money is reached in a reasonable amount of time.

you don't need 20-25k starting stack to have a good structure.

I think you do, at least "good" in the sense that it will attract rec players and allow for some flexibility early. Of course, that doesn't mean you can't have 18K or even 15K, if some of the other parameters are tweaked. I just think 20-25is the sweetspot.

Take, for example the Monster Stack. 15K starting chips. 60 minute day 1 levels. Certainly not a turbo, But its too slow on day 1 IMO. Having to play past dinner on day 2 to make the money is not attractive. This tourney would be better served by 45 minute levels on day 1. Then you could keep the 15K in chips, or maybe increase it a bit. Either way, that would be a better structure, since it would be more rec friendly.

akashenk is right. 2 different things are being discussed as if they are the same:

1. What is an actually good structure.
2. What do rec players perceive as a good structure.

Those two things don't completely overlap. And one of the ways tournaments dress up their ugly structures and fool casual players is by having large starting stacks. Of course, with large and/or speedy blind increases they take it away without anyone really noticing.

All in all, I think it works. Look at the first post of this thread, based solely on starting stack size, $365 WSOP circuit events are among the worst. However, when you dig into how slowly and incrementally the levels increase its really a great structure for the price.

But to ashkenks point: Would you rather play a good structured tournament with no rec players because they think its a bad structure? Or a lesser structured tournament with more rec players who think its a good structure?

The monster sucks? That's why they get 6700 players. It is a great structure. The marathon will do well this year with the low level pros and good rec players. The only complaint I have is with the $1000 and lower buy-ins. The structures are way too fast. I don't look at the chip count, I look at the structure and playability. I am okay with 7500 and 60min levels for the smaller $1500 tournys and love the monster, marathon, main event.

You should consider playing at Binions as they give you lots of chips for not much of a buy-in. I will pass because the structures are really bad after a few hours.

To my knowledge, no one said the Monster Stack sucks. What I said is it could be better. Its too slow early on. And it will be hurt this year by the WSOP's unfathomable decision to make their signature weekend events have day 1s on Sat/Sun instead of Fri/Sat.

And the number of entrants doesn't have a whole lot of bearing on the discussion on what makes for an ideal structure. I mean, the Colossus gets the most and is a horribly structured event, for both pros and recs. That being said, I'm not sure they could hold the Colossus if it had significantly better structure.

I will be curious to see how the marathon does this year. I don't really have a problem with its inclusion since its just one event and offers something different. However, a mid-week tourney that is going to take more than 2 days to reach the money is not going to be very rec-friendly. In fact, that may be the toughest field of any NLH event this Summer. For those who like to challenge themselves, or throw money in spots where the ROI might not be as good as others, this event may still be popular. But I'd be surprised if it gets much more than 2000 entries.

What I perceive to be the main issue people have with shorter stacked structures are the combination of short stacks and blind levels that move too quickly relative to those stacks. Putting aside whether recreational players benefit from slower structures (they do not), recreational players want slower structures because they want to get table time for their money, in addition to their chance at winning some money and fame.

So below I have listed the structures of some tournaments that might see a substantial recreational crowd and note how long you get to play before your starting stack gets near push/fold poker. Now the Colussus and 888 are gimmick events, so their quick structures are no surprise. But what is clear is that the WSOP-C $365's are among the worst structures out there. When you couple that with a large rake, it makes one wonder where the value lies and whether eventually some changes ought to be made.

WSOP $888 NLHE - 5k starting stack - 2:00 later starting stack is 16.67bb (30 min)
WSOP $565 Colossus II - 5k starting stack - 2:00 later starting stack is 16.67bb (30 min)

WSOP-C (Harrah's) $365 - 10k starting stack - 2:20 later starting stack is 20bb (20 min)
Borgata $230 weekly $10k guarantee - 20k starting stack - 2:55 later starting stack is 20bb (25 min)

WSOP-C (HR Tulsa) $365 - 10k starting stack - 3:30 later starting stack is 20bb (30 min)

Foxwoods Saturday $300 (recurring) - 25k starting stack - 4:00 later starting stack is 20bb (30 min)
WSOP $1000 NLHE - 5k starting stack - 4:00 later starting stack is 16.67bb (60 min)

Mohegan $330 Sunday Monthly - 30 k starting stack - 4:30 later starting stack is 25bb (30 min)
Venetian $400 Deep Stacks - 18k starting stack - 4:30 later starting stack is 18bb (30 min)

WSOP $1500 Milly Maker - 7.5k starting stack - 5:00 later starting stack is 18.75bb (60 min)
WSOP $1500 NLHE - 7.5k starting stack - 5:00 later starting stack is 18.75bb (60 min)

PH $600 Goliath - 30k starting stack - 6:40 later starting stack is 25bb (40 min)

WSOP $1500 Solstice - 7.5k starting stack - 7:30 later starting stack is 18.75bb (90 min)

WSOP $1500 Monster Stack - 15k starting stack - 8:00 later starting stack is 18.75bb (60 min)

I agree with your analysis in general, but two points...

1) As a rec player, I never liked the old days when you got 3x your buyin in chips in WSOP events. But it wasn't because they were too fast (these had some of, if not the, slowest structures around at the time). It was because early mistakes and/or bad luck could cripple you or send you packing too easily. Anecdotally, I remember the last time I played one of these (the 1111 Little One for one drop, with 4500 chips), I turned the nut flush and a guy with top set put me all in and caught his boat on the river. Buh bye in level 2. This would have been much less likely to have happened if we started with 20K.

2) Rec players do want to get lots of play for their money early (hence one of the desires to have more starting chips), and may be willing to give up some play later to get it. However, the length of time to the money is a big factor for rec players, since, basically by definition, rec players don't have as much time to play as pros. Tourneys that go late into day 2 or beyond to make the money are not rec-friendly. That doesn't mean their structure is "bad", it just means their structure is not conducive to rec players. I keep bringing up the Monster Stack. That tourney's structure is plenty slow, providing lots of play early. But last year, they didn't reach the money until well into day 2 (after dinner if memory serves). And that's when they were paying 15% of the field (again if memory serves). That factor seriously diminishes the attractiveness of this event for rec players. And think about how much worse it will be this year, when a rec player will have to take a day off from their normal schedule/job just to play day 2 and not know if they will make any money.

WSOP used to give you $1 for $1 only in tourney chips based on the tourney Buyin.

$1500 gets you 1500 in tourney chips

And level 1 was 25/25. There was a time when there were $5T chips in play.*

*Not NLHE

a good structure has more to do with level length than starting stack. 5x ur buyin in starting stack is excellent and should stay that way

It would seem good structure is in the eye of the beholder.

Good structure meaning "one that doesn't devolve into average stacks being at or under 20 big blinds so that it is push/fold when the real money is at stake", absolutely is basically completely dependent on 1) level length and 2) gradualness of level increases. Obviously hour levels don't matter at extreme outliers like "start with 500 chips at 25/50", but within reason, level length and gradual increases are by far the two biggest factors in having play late.

However, plog's post is spot on, in that rec players 1) like lots of chips, 2) don't like busting early, 3) mostly will bust before the last few tables, so they don't see the benefit of being 35bb deep there instead of 13bb deep. I heard guys in line at the WSOP last year saying how much better the $235 deepstack than the $1k WSOP because you got 3 times as many chips. Of course, at the $1k WSOP final table, you will be 3-4 times deeper on average than at the $235 final table, but that only matters to 9 people, right?

The biggest difficulty to overcome is 2, because for a tournament to not run too long, you have to either 1) play meaningful pots early, or 2) skip levels late. Well, playing meaningful pots early means that you might bust early.

Another problem is that players often go crazy with raise sizes at small blinds which makes the tournaments play shallower. When WSOP had 4500 stacks for $1500 events, but started with an hour of 25/25, you lose that benefit when players are opening for 150 or 200, then c-betting 350 or 400 in headsup pots. Yeah, now you missed one AK and got an AQ5 flop on your 99 and you feel short.

This why I advocate for tourneys with 20-25K in chips and starting levels at 40-45 minutes, with level lengths increasing later in the tourney. Its the best of both worlds. You get lots of chips and play early, but the blind levels are not so long as to cause it to take a long time to get to the money. Depending on the payout structure and other tweaks, there's no reason a tourney structured in some way close to this can't get in the money relatively early on day 2. And with level lengths increasing on day 2 and beyond (if applicable), it makes sure the play remains relatively deep as the tourney goes on.

A lot of clueless-ness in this thread. The only pertinent comment is below
The WSOPc $365s have one of the BEST structures at THIS level of buyin. The levels are 40 minute length past level 12, and 50-minutes past level 21 (when it matters.) You get 2 hours of no-ante deep play at the beginning.

The rake is comparable if not lower than most other $300+x events (even if they are for example $300+$50 they usually take 3% of the prize pool whereas WSOPc doesn't - so they're more like $291+$59 where the rake is 20% of the money that goes in the prizepool, and the WSOPc the rake is 21.6% of the money that goes in the prizepool, the difference accounting for the $10,000 freeroll that you might qualify for.)

As for the WSOP bracelet events, probably some of the best structures around minus WPT mains, except the Collosus/888 shove/turbo fests.

I agree Busto. The $365 circuit events have great value for the money. You start with 10,000 chips and the BB at 50. So you begin with 200 BBs and it takes quite a while before you really start to feel the blind pressure.

FWIW, according to the structure sheet for the 888 (http://www.wsop.com/pdfs/structuresh...1352_15660.pdf), they have upped the starting stack to 8k this year from the 5k of last year's first go round. This has to make the 888 now a pretty decent value tourney considering you get 7500 ss for the typical 1500. I'm surprised WSOP hasn't highlighted this change more.