What is the general opinion of the trend for poker rooms to institute single ante tournaments?

Personally I think it will be the end of skill in tournament poker, the tournament scene is fast becoming big bankroll shovefests.

What do you think?

Where I play they went to them a few months ago, and I haven't noticed any effect like you mention at all.

Why would this be the result from having only one player post the ante?

Speeding up the game allows for a higher skill component, everything else unchanged

It definitely speeds things up. But there are downsides, like when tables break and the guy who just paid his BB and all antes gets put in a seat where he has to pay the BB again right away and all the antes.

I also think it should make TDs get more aggressive about balancing tables early in tournaments and staying on it because its a flat charge for the antes regardless of whether you have ten players or eight at a table.

Agree TDs need to be more on top of table balancing with single ante.

The downside you mention is offset by the other occurrence, where a short stack is moved to the button, and then gets purely free hands instead of being chiseled away.

The upside of more hands per level, and additional flexibility/smoothness of structure with less chips on the table, are very worth it IMO, from both a playing and dealing perspective.

Yes. Overall agree that, on balance, this is a good method. Its just one more thing to adapt to, but the part about everyone throwing in antes each hand goes away. That part is very easy to adapt to. Much more efficient.

I really haven't seen too many people complain after having their table break and them moving close to the big blind position, even when they just paid the big blind. Hand-for-hand seems like it would last a little bit longer but rarely does my house get to paying more than 1 table's worth of players.

I think that current table balancing standards are acceptable and TDs should ignore players who whine about a mere two-player difference.

If player just paid BB and antes, gets moved to a new table and into a position that has to pay BB and ante. The player must wait until the button passes before being dealt in. Most TD will move a player who is about to be BB, this eliminates most problems.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

I mean, maybe at your place....

The problem he is describing isn't when moving a player to a different table to balance tables. He is talking about when breaking the entire table to combine tables. It is a random draw for seats and the player that just posted may get sent to a seat where they will post again immediately. Nothing you can do about it.

This is a more general question, but how is it handled when a player is very short on chips and doesn't have enough for everyone's ante?

There are two camps that have argued about this, over which is posted first, the BB or the ante. Different casinos have different house rules.

Say a player has 1 BB and is in the BB. If they post the BB first, they would win a BB from everyone who entered the pot if they win the pot. If they post the ante first, they would only win their ante back if they win the pot.

I think as long as the casino is clear on the rule, either way is fine. It's obviously pretty rare for someone to be in the BB with less than 2 BB.

I would think most places handle it the same way they did in the past when a player had less chips than needed to post his BB and the regular ante?

The problem just shifts from the player having less than 1BB + single ante to having less than 1BB + table ante.

I'm in the ante first camp, but can see why some players disagree with that.

It moves the game along so much faster than waiting for everyone to post, making change, and fighting about who is missing an ante. So superior.

I've only played in one, I think. Really liked it for the speed-up and not dorking around getting everyone's antes.

The blind comes first and then anything left over goes towards the ante. Also, the ante amount is fixed, regardless of how many players there are at the table and is typically the same as the big blind.

Maybe at your place...




I don't understand why people state things as thought there is a world-wide rulebook without specifying that it's not necessarily the case everywhere.


At the place I play, the ante is paid first. Neither is right nor wrong as long as the rule is consistent at any given location. Also, I don't know personally which ones, but there are some places that adjust the BB-ante dynamically for the number of players at the table. I prefer having the standard set amount (dead big blind in the middle posted by the big blind), but I'm not going to make a statement to make it sound like that's how it is everywhere.

It is interesting no one mentioned the increase of the antes!
The elimination of 25 unit chips.
The old style the antes really don't get high until level 9 or 10
but in single ante the antes increase at every level.
I am not surprised people are interested in speeding up the game at the expense of skill.
The whining about antes and having to get people to post usually is dealer driven, dealers hate tournaments, and a slow tournament is usually due to bad dealers whining about antes.

So, 1000,2000,2000 level, you are the BB with 2000.
Your 8 opponents all limp.
18000 in the pot.
You can win 2000.
You can just get your chips back.
Seems fair.

Another question ...

2000, 4000, 4000 level
UTG throws in his last 1000.
How much of the 4000 ante can he win?

Its not usually a big deal. But where it is an issue is when it happens to a short stack while on or near the bubble.... That was always an issue but with a Big Blind Ante it becomes a bigger deal.

I'm not saying that it means you shouldn't use this format .... just that one negative aspect of this is that it can make the distortion caused by luck of the draw on table breaks more significant.

The other downside is that it effectively makes the structure faster when playing short handed. I'm not really saying that early in the tournament players should be whinning about being short one or two players. But imagine you are playing late in the tournament with 11 players. lets suppose at this stage you are posting a 10000 ante. The five handed table is effectively playing a level withthe equivalent of 2000 individual antes. The six handed table is playing the same level with 1667 antes .... and then when you lose a player and go to a 10 handed final table suddenly ypu are playing the equivalent of 1000 antes.... Its not that it is unfair ... its just a distortion that makes no sense to me.

This actually doesn;t have to be an issue. Our structure was designed to try to be as close to possible as our regular structure. This does mean that in some levels the Ante is not the same amount as the BB. This sometimes upsets players who are used to the ante being the same amount as the BB but thats just because they got used to it one way.

If you just make the antes roughly equal in total to what the total antes for a round in your regular ante structure it isn;t necessarily a faster structure. Yes there is distortion as the number of players change at the table .... but overall its pretty similar.

This is pretty much all false. In most tourneys, you pay more per level in traditional ante than single ante, except at short tables.

I was just at a tourney series where it was still traditional ante and many different players at many tables expressed how much they wish it was single ante.

Single ante results in more hands per level which increases, not decreases, skill factors.

I have not played in a single ante tournament yet. Is the difference in speed noticeable?