Source: http://www.pokerstars.com/en/blog/to...n-162740.shtml

I think this is a good firm step in the wrong direction, decreasing the skill in events for the players.

I'm indifferent. I think this will increase the amount of players actually playing in the events which will probably be good for poker in general. Sucks for those live crushers that have to take a hit to their roi though.

The more people who cash, the better for the poker economy. You need the regs to feel excited about cashing, otherwise they won't play again.

Does anybody have any good info as to how this affects the skill factor and the ROI% for strong players?

Not something that I have put much time into thinking about so I would love to hear more.

15% of the field cashing is fine. Using your logic paying out 90% of the field would be a good thing.

It seems like they've started to do this a bit more on Stars at a lot of different levels, so maybe it's part of a larger trend?

Guess if they keep the very top payouts the same, then are they paying out less for middle and middle-late finishes?

just give everyone who lasts longer than 2h some sort of EPT gift card. maybe an EPT hoodie and 20% off a the buffe

why not 25%? go for it ps!

You luckboxed a few MTTs and are now an expert. They'll always be 99% luck in a live environment with absurdly small samples and high variance. To want to keep the money within such a tiny percentage of the overall player pool (tourney pros) is just stupid. Let the casual players min cash and dump it off in cash games. Everyone wins except the busto "tourney pros" who lose it to rake, travel expenses, and sucking anyway.

While the best players in the world may see this as a bad move that effects their ROI there are so many reasons it is actually a smart move both for the company and the majority of its customers.

As for the effect on the actual gameplay, this will actually make the bubble less arduous and likely much quicker since there will both me more tables still going as well as less incentive to stall into the money.

Instead of looking at this in terms of, "What is best for ME" it might be wise to look at it in terms of what is best for the health of the tournaments going forward.

Good, long overdue

who cares....it lowers variance for the pros, and while your ROI will decrease, the fields might get slightly softer cancelling the effect out.

Which is specifically wat they want and aligns moar than nicely w their milk teh dying cow as hard as possible

So let's say people who are not as skillful at tournament poker will make up the majority of this 15-20% cashing range. These people will then have confidence and cash in their pockets to play cash games, or more tournaments. What will happen is a slower rising of top players to the top. As ROI may decrease, so will variance, and the effect of this change in the short term will be negated in the long term.

Let's face it, people who solely grind tourneys like this and are long term winning players make up such a small niche in the poker world. It is the tournaments that made this game popular in the first place and will continuously do so.

It's surprising the amount of people supporting the change here whereas when they ****ed with a bunch of their online scheduled mtts (bigs / hots etc) and sunday million payout structures i don't think i saw one person supporting them and full complaints and i don't think they went back on it.

I suppose this is nvg though and not mtt community forums

I'm still waiting for a venue with balls that would be willing to adopt my ultra radical "sole loser" payout structure. Effectively everyone gets to go home and tell the whoever how they cashed in the poker tournament, just like the pros do. It can also be tradition for everyone to point at the sole loser and "haha him" Nelson Muntz style.

And we don´t need to play the tournament. Just wire the rake and they just pick the loser by chance. Everybody gets to stay home.

WOW! This from EPT release:

"For example, 220 players bought into a €1,000 Hyper at Barcelona last year. The winner collected €45,134 and 31 players were paid out with 31st getting €1,878. This year, the winner would collect €38,028 but 47 players would be paid out with 47th getting €1,238. That same 31st player would get €1,921."

Based on last year's event that paid 45,134 to 1st, if that was a typical WSOP event in the USA with 220 players, it would have paid 55,410. So it was already much flatter (and better IMHO) than stateside events. Now it will go even lower to 38,028! At 38,028 if you prorated that to the WSOP main event this year that paid $8 million to 1st, then the WSOP main would pay $3.8 million to first. I believe in flatter payouts, but this might be even too low for me. I think WSOP main at $5.8 million vs. $8 million is a reasonable goal to shoot for in the future. I am good with 15% payout, but going to 20% might be an overreach but I will be interested to see how it works out. Good for the EPT to give it a shot. (and having already good less top heavy payouts)

Obviously for the EPT this is great because it discourages crushers from entering. Less skill difference means people don't get their ass handed to them and lose less on average, more payouts (even for the minimum) means someone can enter again and pay more rake.

I'm thinking of more ways for PS/EPT to say "**** you" to any winning players. They are getting so obvious I'm just waiting for them to send out that e-mail that basically tells any winning to GTFO or they rape your pet.

If chainsaw play EPT`s he must be a very happy guy

You need an international association, something like ATP for tennis, to protect the interests of professional poker players.

Pretty sure a lot of recreationals are going to be like "wtf are you kidding me I get no profit after beating 80% of the field?"

The backlash online was fairly massive and it was changed to have every mincash be closer to 2x. The only ones who will like this are qualifiers to whom the buyin is gigantic.

it's funny how self-centred and ignorant poker players are ... NO event organizer provides tournaments, so a bunch full of pros can make a living. it's some sort of entertainment and if more ppl cash, more ppl will re-enter and have a great story to tell.

"buy in, min cash and re-enter" events like the colossus are a success, not because some pros can win big money, but because average joe gets "lots of poker" for his buy-in

EDIT: not saying 20% for every event is great, but especially for the low buy-in stuff this could be 'Fun' for recs

if most of the poker-pros wouldn't only care about themselves, an association would be possible. but even then, who cares what some pros want.

and besides that, show me the big tennis tournaments, where the prize pool is generated through amateurs entering

I said ATP just as example but maybe this is more the case where an international poker federation is even better. I mean an organization who fix rules and certificate standards. Buyins, payouts, rake, timebanks, blinds structures approved by the international poker federation would be cool

This does exist and it is called the Poker Tournament Directors Association

http://www.pokertda.com/

comprised of the more prominent poker room bosses out there who do exactly that.

And there is a good reason 'Pros' are not given too much voice in deciding buy-ins, rake, structures and the like. They all are always seeking some EDGE, which would almost always be in there favor of course. So LOL at wanting poker pros to create the rules Governing poker tournaments.

I promise you if you think poker isn't already a dying past time, these dumb fks would accelerate it ten fold. They need to adjust and stfu, they are pros after-all right. So surely they should be able to adjust and still win/profit, or else they arent so pro after-all!