On the PLO story with the review of the tape, I thought once the cards hit the muck the hand is dead?

Scott, please look into changing the payout structure... this is just ridiculous. If I play in a 1000 person tournament and get 70th place and don't get a dime, I would be livid. You're ruining business, and reminding people why they don't play MTT's at THR Tampa. They've been absurdly bad all the way around from day one, and this isn't helping the case at all. Pay 10% of the field straight up just like everyone else does. For the sake of your own poker room.

FWIW, while I totally agree with you, I think it would be equally ridiculous to change the payout structure after the event has already started (terrible precedent, imo).

While I totally agree with you, I highly doubt anyone would mind an extra ~30 places paying out (what would mostly be min cashes). Realizing how dumb your payout structure is and fixing it before players make the money isn't a huge deal IMO. Stopping play at 9% (where almost anywhere else you would be in the money) and only paying <6% is absurd. I wonder how many people made day 2 already and think they're in the money, only to find out they still have to grind Sunday for a few hours to even mincash. Totally absurdly ******ed.

I agree with this - until you get in the top 5% on day two this is a non-issue. Most people expect a standard 10%.

For me - I would like to see more tournaments go to 11% - which is where I usually end up.

Looking at all the complaints at the payout structure makes me want to play this. A more top heavy payout structure benefits better players, as a person who plays tournies properly plays to win, not to mincash.

Were I a tourny player playing in this one, I would very much mind having an extra 30 places paid, if I were playing. That's at least 6k out of the prize pool.

So actually I applaud a more top heavy payout structure good job hr.

This is just moronic... even the best players in the world would argue against this as it will lower your ROI longterm. Way too much variance in MTTs, nevermind only paying 1 out of 20 players. STFU already.

The real problem lies with the fact that they told no one, did not list the payout percentages anywhere, and when players specifically ask questions about how many go on to Day 2, or the guarantee, etc., the supervisors happily offer up every single detail about the tournament EXCEPT the payout percentage. This, of course, is most undoubtedly because they know it will piss the person off, word will spread, and they'll have to deal with angry customers. Again.

All that information is freely available. All you have to do is ask. As evidenced by this thread, it seems a good many people are aware of the percentages.

Thanks for the suggestion. For now, I suggest you follow @shrtpoker

Scott- thanks for making the changes to the website; I think that's a good step in the right direction.

Ref. the payout thing, is that paytable K available at the Brush stand? Maybe you could add it to the Little Slick banner as a link like you did the standings?(which was a great idea, BTW).

I thought we were playing down to the money for day 1s and we all come back in the money Sunday but apparently that's not the case. I like top heavy payouts and 30% for 1st. that's why we play tourneys for the big payouts. Hollywood pays out like 14% of the field but their 1st place was like 16% of the total prize pool which is horrible. and when we get down to the money on Sunday, please be able to control the 100 people that want to "pay the bubble boy" i'm not paying the bubble boy...i'd rather be the bubble boy.

I'd like to point out how super impressed I am with the staff running the tourneys and how you have a guy from Hollywood HR assisting who really knows what he's doing. it made bagging and tagging quick and easy and nobody was confused about how many hands were left. I hope this is just the start to big guarantees! Maybe do a 300.00 200K next time

I'm a reg at DBKC and have never played at SHR before. Anyone have an idea of comparison for how the player pool strength compares between the two? I'd assume DBKC would be tougher just because the people that go there go specifically to play poker so you don't get the casino players that wander in to play poker like I'd think SHR would have. Which room is softer?

I have asked in the past at the room, and you are the first one that provided a straight answer. The only reason there are a "good many people" in this thread aware of the percentages is that I posted it here. No one I've spoken to knew anything about it until I told them. Thanks for coming clean. Now you just need to fix it for next time.

You must be the luckiest AH on the planet. Because everyone else who plays tournaments has to occasionally flip and lose or get it in against that 1% that knocks you out. Anyway, thanks for sharing super-poker-guy.

If you click on the little slick standings link on the poker page on the THR website, and scroll down past the bottom of the list to page 3' the minimum payout table is there. 1st is $25,610, 2d is 15k, third is 9800. Last place cash is 63d place, at 340.

Thanks for posting that, Scott.

That would be the pay schedule for 1000 entries. I guess what Scott said about the payouts not depending on the guarantee if there is an overlay is not true:

Not that it matters, since it will hit over 1K entries anyway.

I'd think it's just based on the 1k, with them feeling confident it will be reached. Perhaps if it turned out less than 1000, they would adjust it.

Just as a general comment, my feeling is that while the particular payout % is smaller than usual, overall I feel like they are doing a pretty good job of "spreading their wings" by trying new stuff like this tourney and the high hands. And Scott has been very responsive to some of the suggestions, like adding stuff to the website.

So while there are growing pains, I do feel like there seems to have been an honest effort to consider/implement new things, and they deserve a lot of credit for that.

Not sure why you guys get so butthurt at the suggestion that a top heavy payout is better. You guys must mincash a lot.

While I'd like to say don't listen to these guys, it seems all the fish are going to be upset if the tournies continue like this, so I'd consider paying more of the field next time.

It's because not all of us are circuit grinders who play 50+ MTT's a year, and I doubt there are many of those who are playing a $125. Please find me more tournaments that pay out 5% of the field... you won't, because it's dumb. I understand wanting the top prize to be big, but I can almost guarantee it will get chopped up like 5-10 ways anyway, so what does it matter? It's not so much about mincashing to me as it is playing 16 hours in a $125 tournament and not getting paid after having outlasted 93% of the field. 10% is standard because it makes sense. Only in satellites do you beat a full table and still not get anywhere, and that's for a reason. I plan on winning the tourney, as I do every one I enter, but paying 5% of such a large field is just bad. Period.

Another of the world's greatest who has no clue what variance is. You should just go play with yourself in a corner since none of us fish are in your imaginary league.

It's standard because people get upset just like you said for playing for a long time and not getting anything. If only the better players who know to play to win get paid, no fish play, games won't run. Very simple. I'm not going to get into a derail into proper or improper poker strat, but to end it I'm very glad so many people seem to play all the time in Tampa don't understand proper winning strategy, whine when they don't get their way, and get upset if someone challenges their opinion on an online forum. You should be very profitable to play against.

It's not about any of that genius, it's about balancing out the variance and keeping money flowing in the poker community. You're arguing against your own point. Let's pay 5% of the field in every tournament and see how long poker lasts. Maybe then you and the 4 other guys who seem to be the only ones who know proper strat can play with each other until one person has all the poker money in the area. Quit being a moron and realize it's bad for poker. If this is a one time thing, it's no big deal, but if they do this for every big tourney, in the longrun, a lot of people are gonna go broke, thus drying up the games, making the guarantees smaller, etc. Use your brain like you claim to and be logical. Some of the best players in the world barely cash >10% of the time, and that's with 10% payout structure. It keeps money flowing in the community, which will eventually trickle upwards to the better players anyway. I consider myself top 10% of players who will be playing this, or most tournies <$5k anyway, so I don't mind so much, but if this is going to be standard for THR MTTs, it's a very bad idea and poker will die faster than it already is.

I'm glad you read the first two things I posted in what you quoted, where I stated that although it benefits better players, the fish won't play because they feel they have a worse chance of playing etc etc, which you can extrapolate into games dying.

I think you misunderstand the poker economy. Your post assumes most people win, which is just not the case. Your post forgets that most people who play poker have disposable income, or can't afford to play and make the income disposable. This is where the most money comes from, not from the people who mincash and get their money raked over and over again. The concept of your post is correct, but the reasoning is wrong. Intermittent reinforcement is what keeps losing players playing, and thinking that they are winning.

No cap