I'm currently a reg in the new Fifty50s on PS. (As an aside I really like the new format but from what I read and hear there are a large group of people who don't) The following idea tries to combine the best parts of Fifty50s and hyper satellites and hopefully appeal to high-stakes grinders as well.

Structure

Same as current Fifty50 but eliminate the first four non-ante levels(i.e. start the tourney at the 40/80/5 level)

Because the tourneys will now take less time I think it would be fair PS to lower the rake. Here are some suggested levels off the top of my head

$500+10
$200+5
$100+3
$50+2 and so on

MODS I apologize if this post is in the wrong place

This would probably be better posted under "Internet Poker" but it's whatev:

I see nothing wrong with it. I don't know if there would be enough demand for a game like this for 'stars to actually provide it, but it seems like something I would be willing to grind. Hi variance of course, but it would also probably attract a lot of fish that aren't good at push/fold.

I disagree that its high variance. Variance is a function mostly of the percentage of players that cash and the steepness of the payout curve. I don't see it being significantly different than for the current Fifty50s. Variance is high in hyper-satellites because they only pay 2 places out of 6.

Variance is also a function of someone's ROI (closer you get to 0% the bigger the swings are). Taking away levels will lower max ROI's for obvious reasons. Same reason it is possible to get a higher ROI in non-turbo versions of the same game.

Not to nitpick but variance is not a function of %ROI. Risk of ruin is however and people often confuse the two, Now as to whether max acheivable %ROI is definitely lowered by removing the early levels that is a matter of debate. My experience tells me that when the table is full of mostly regs the early levels are often just an exercise in mass folding. It is only when multiple fish are present that there is a lot of early action. Usually a few of them get eliminated and one fish ends up with a big stack. Whether this results in greater max ROI for the good players is again a matter of debate.

While what you say is true, it is HIGHER variance than the current format (which is all I was trying to say). I wasn't saying that it's as swingy as the hypers, but you are starting with a relatively small stack/BB ratio, so naturally you aren't going to be able to always wait for great situations to get your money in.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an option for regular turbo sngs play out kind of like this. Absolute poker offers sngs that start you out with 1500 chips but run like hyper turbos in terms of the blinds. I think PS should have something like that too.

think they would make something like rush fs

You are right. I shouldn't have said it is a function of it, but it is directly related to it's size. Bigger ROI=smaller downswings and vice versa.

I still disagree with you about best possible ROI. So if your point is true about the same possible ROI regardless of how many levels we ought to be able to achieve the same ROI whether there is a one level game or a full day Fifty50.

Yes, of course, longer times between blind increases should yield higher max ROi. My idea is just to eliminate the first lower levels, not to shorten the remaining ones.