Your math only works to a skew if there is only one table on one of the Day 1s, which never happens. There are usually a minimum of 4 tables at such satellites, so there will always be a range of results.

There is, however, a possible advantage to playing one of the less populated satellites. They always play down to 9%, so bring over the average number of chips per player. A larger day may play down to Level 14 before they reach 9%, in which case they bring over less than the average number of chips per player.

Scott-

Thanks for sending the payout sheet. Boiling it down, it looks like this:

#Players - Spots Paid

101-130 - 13 (12.8%-10%)
131-160 - 16 (12,2%-10%)
161-320 - 19 (11.8%-5.9%)
321-480 - 28 (8.7%-5.8%)
481-640 - 37 (7.7%-5.7%)
641-800 - 46 (7.1%-5.7%)
etc.

This is the weirdest payout schedule I've seen, with a fixed number of spots paid per range of entries rather than a percentage of entries being paid. No wonder I could never get an answer before as to what percentage of the players get paid at any THR tournament.

OK, let me get this straight. Obviously they're expecting to get near or over 1000 entries in order to cover the guarantee. But you're saying the more entries there are, the smaller the percentage of the field being paid out--- to the tune of only 46 people paid out of a hypothetical field of 800? (Hell, what's the payout for 1000 players? Final table only gets paid?)

I don't get it. Regressive payout percentages seems too strange even for THR...

The ONLY thing I can think of is that they think that when the numbers get up there it will likely be because a lot of people who bust out are reentering on a later day. So therefore paying 5.7% of "entries" is close to perhaps 10% of "players."

Of course, how they would know that is beyond me, and obviously this is not what is done in rebuy tournaments, etc., but just trying to deduce something that would be somewhat logical. (Ok, perhaps not logical-logical, but THR-logical. You get what I mean...)

This is best I could come up with, and I am now going to go and take a handful of Excedrin and lay down in a dark room.

I'm guessing that the payout structure may be one of several produced by the WPT. The reason I say that is on the WPT site, on the Tampa Winter Open page, they have a link to the payout structure, and its title is Payout Structure [A]. Since this one is K, makes me think WPT has a variety of tables used depending on what you want to emphasize(eg number of field paid vs % of prize pool to first, etc).

this is just speculation on my part. But why would you have a structure names "K" if there wasnt an A thru J ?

I miscounted the number of payout spots by one on my previous post (counted the header row). Here it is corrected and extended:

101-130 12 11.88%-9.23%
131-160 15 11.45%-9.38%
161-320 18 11.18%-5.63%
321-480 27 8.41%-5.63%
481-640 36 7.48%-5.63%
641-800 45 7.02%-5.63%
801-960 54 6.74%-5.63%
961-1120 63 6.56%-5.63%
1121-1280 72 6.42%-5.63%
1281-1440 81 6.32%-5.63%
1441-1600 90 6.25%-5.63%
1601-1760 99 6.18%-5.63%
1761-1920 108 6.13%-5.63%

Seems that once it hits 321 entries, the payout is jumped by 9 spots for every 160 entries. Makes for a diminishing payout percentage on the low side of each spread.

In real terms for this tournament, it means that the top 5 1/2 to 6 1/2 % of the field will be paid (rounded off). Pretty top heavy for a large MTT.

this is a really awesome post. just wanted to add "rake free" satellites that are still 25+10 are pretty LOL

If this is the case this loses major value. The 10mm guarantee in Hollywood guaranteed if they didn't get the 2000 players needed to cover the 10mm, they still paid 300 runners. This cannot pay 5%, that number is just ridiculous. While they will still get the numbers I don't know if I can justify playing myself. Hope this gets changed real fast.

Scott, this is the strangest payout structure ever. You'll be losing a lot of entries once people find out that the payout field is only about half what it is in every other tournament everywhere. I have no idea why it was set up this way in the first place, but I highly recommend trying to get it changed to a normal payout structure for poker tournaments here on Earth.

As is, I won't be playing. And I'll do my best to inform all the other players every day about these payouts.

When you have a guarantee, like in this case 100k which equals 1000 entries, does that mean that for any amount of actual entries less than 1000, that the number of spots paid is based upon 1000? So if say there were 800 runners, would you enter the table at 800 or 1000?

Thanks.

The number of places paid is based on the number of entries, the guarantee doesn't figure in.

I would just die laughing if they get 1900 players and announce that they're paying 108 of them. Too bad most of the players will have been eliminated by that point, but hopefully the "feedback" will nudge them in the right direction in the future.

Trying to make it top heavy to get a buzz going re THR tourneys generally, IMO.

Anyone know how many runners were in the 11am Little Slick Day 1A?

I called the poker room and was told 150 for 1A.

Scott,

i think it would be a good idea if you paid the top 10%.

Thanks

Thanks, Red. That should bode well for a fairly large field. I thought that today's day ones, especially the morning one, would have the lowest turnout. If so, they should end up well over the 1000 needed for the guarantee.

Yeah they neeed 125 per flight to get to 1k. While I'm not 100% in in favor of 5-7% payouts this is going to have such a rebuy aspect that min cash needs to be more than 200 just for some to stop the bleeding. I think im I'm gonna give it a go Saturday. Its still a 100k gtd for 125$ there is still some value. Plus I need some time in to prep for derby and Silks Halloween tournaments.

I was planning on playing this, but if the payout % doesn't get changed before day 2 I may have to skip it and tell my buddies to as well. Paying 5% of a 1000+ player field is just atrocious and should be changed immediately.

Day 1A: 155
Day 1B: 141

Anyone know if the Little Slick Day 1's will be capped with a maximum number of entries?

I fully support this comment

Seriously though, you are on the right track in using PokerPro for a single purpose in a room... i.e. Build up a healthy, competitive Omaha business Good for the Omaha players and builds competitive advantage for the room in the local market.

The biggest problem with Omaha is that there is no reasonable entry point for average 1/2 NL type player (which is a good chunk of the rec market). Getting steady flow of new rec players introduced to Omaha is the key to growing that business.

.25 /.50 and /or .50 /1 PLO can be spread with great success. The game is a blast for players and would bring new players into a room. Getting a few incremental lower stakes PLO games each day on PokerPro is beneficial to a live 1/2PLO ecosystem which is beneficial to a 2/5PLO ecosystem, etc etc.

Same could be said for lower stakes Limit O8, where efficiency of table for splitting pots increases the fun and action. Much lower stakes O8 could be profitably spread.

In my limited experience with it at Hard Rock and at Daytona there is a core group of players who always seem to insist that the game be split pot. Rec 1-2 NL players are run off by that game because they've either heard of the more advanced strategies involved in quartering people, or they experience it first hand. O8 regs have a significant advantage in that respect. And it takes time to calculate pots with multiple players and stacks and the game tends to play a lot slower.

Neither of which is enticing to 1/2 NL rec players, who typically have a limited amount of time to play on a given day.

PLO hi only may be dull the edge of a seasoned PLO O8 player. But I personally think that if you want to generate more interest among low limit rec NL players, hi-only is the way to go.

It would be great if they would also start an email list so people who care can be updated as things change. Is there such a thing? If not, why not? I would go so far to say they should create an AP with live updates on everything. Also, I would love to see them post tournament results. But that's just for the purposes of morbid curiosity.

Hey where did you finish? Top 6%. Cool how much did you get? Nothing! WTF? I don't understand how I see so many tournaments are run in such a ******ed fashion. Who is making this crap up? What is the incentive to play in this tournament if you finish in the top 6% of 1000 person field and can't cash? It's insanity. I played already and luckily was free rolling from the cash game. Was going to play again, now not a chance.