Quote:
Originally Posted by 18m beast
I don't think 27 and 90m is ever going to work without hugely affecting 18, 45, 180s. I would suggest bringing in 27m and dumping the 45s altogether ( I think this is how it is on .it), the volume would be massive and they'd run better in quiet times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mckrogh
Nah dont drop 45man. They are quite popular.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18m beast
They'll be less popular with 27m though, $15 and up.
I've chopped the quoted posts down a little to remove the part about buy-ins. I'll tackle the 45 vs 27 question first and look at the idea of changing buy-ins in a different post.
It is true that 27-mans are very popular on PokerStars.IT. However, we need to look at why that is the case before taking it as a sign that 27-mans could be a lot more popular on .COM.
Pokerstars.IT has a smaller player pool than .COM, which means careful consideration has to be given to the liquidity issues I described in my long post. Therefore, PokerStars.IT has a multi-table SNG offering that suits that player pool. There are no 18-mans at all on .IT and the highest buy-in 45-man is €5, because the player pool isn't large enough to support higher buy-in 45s that would run regularly. Having a higher buy-in on the basis it might run occasionally isn't a good idea because it can be very frustrating for players to register in Sit & Gos that don't run.
In effect, that means that 27-mans are the main MTT-SNGs on .IT and the only choice above €5. Even at €5 and below the 27-mans run far more often because the smaller player pool means it is a lot harder to achieve the critical mass necessary to run a 45-man.
Now lets compare that to .COM. 27-mans have to compete with an equal range of buy-ins for both 18-mans and 45-mans. Not only that but the .COM player pool is much larger so 27-mans don't have the same advantage in terms of liquidity. Overall 45-mans run a lot more often than 27-mans, although I accept that is influenced by the fact that there are no turbo 27-mans.
The main point though is that in terms of avoiding a split in player pools, an 18-45-90 progression seems more appropriate than an 18-27-90 progression, especially as the 18-man and 27-man will directly compete for players.