Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaKing
ICM is maths.
That is exactly I want to say
Quote:
Originally Posted by SageDonkey
Deciding whether to late reg and how late you do it, is part of the skill of playing MTTs.
Late regging will typically increase your ICM, by how much depends on the tournament and payout structure, but it also depends on the strength of the remaining field at the point at which you late reg, relative to regging at the start.
You also have to take into account your own skill level playing shallower because if your edge is bigger deep stacked then late regging might technically increase your ICM value, but in reality you've reduced your own EV.
Your message is very good attending to a strategical point as a player. I mean, a player should know exactly what you said, every player should know it.
But here IŽm talking about that there is a rule that is unfair, that a player should not have an advantage just because he is late
Imagine a tournament that has these rules:
1.-Winner takes it all
2.-If you enter on Day 1 I give you 10.000 points, if you enter on Day 2 I give you 10.300 points
It will be unfair and absurd. Every player will act strategically as you suggest, but as Tournament Director it will be very fool tournament and decision
Well, in fact, all tournaments are as I exposed
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pcallinallin
The first 2 hours are for noobs.
There is one thing that some personalities of poker suggested time ago, including, if IŽm not mistaken, Tom Dwan and Matt Savage, that it is make a long first level, but not as deep as normal
I did it in one tournament, first level is a Big Blind of 1% of stack, but lasts as 6 regular levels.
Maybe instead 50-100, 100-200, 150-300, 200-400 is better start with a Level 1 200-400 but lasts 4 levels, for example
Quote:
Originally Posted by toki
If I don't reg at all it's +EV
Yep, as a player yes, but the issue here, or this post, IŽm talking to tournament directors and poker authorities
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK
I don't exactly know what OP is suggesting should be done here, and I don't understand what the "PokerStars problem" he is referencing is.
It is a problem I donŽt want to talk, but there are other posts in this forum that will explain you carefully
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK
Also, it's a bit misleading to use SNGs as an example, as SNGs have much higher ICM distortions early on (since they pay 30% of the field and the exact bubble pays out 60% of the prize pool) and of course you can't late reg an SNG.
Yes, but just I could expose as a example a Sit and Go, I could not write an example of a 500 player tournament
But mathematically the effect is similar
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK
That said, the registration periods in a lot of tournaments have gotten ridiculous. In many live tournaments now, you can register well into the second day.
Yep, fully agree with you. And even there are many problems with is, as you expose a couple of them, also the ICM issue with late register is by far much bigger
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK
This does create a slight ICM advantage for people who are late regging. But I think more importantly, it destroys the structure of the tournament. In the middle stages of the tournament, when most players who entered at a normal time have an average stack of 30 or 50 BBs, you suddenly end up with a bunch of new entrants with 10-15 BB stacks. Now everyone pretty much has to play push/fold, and the care that the tournament structure makes to assure a steady increase in blinds to retain the potential for post-flop play becomes irrelevant.
Good point too. Very interesting
Quote:
Originally Posted by NickMPK
I would love to see tournaments go back to the the standard from about 10 years ago where you could only late reg for a reasonable amount of time (e.g. 2 hours) and you did so with a slight penalty to your starting stack.
I agree with you. Unfortunetaly, it will be difficult, because if stacks lose blinds until new player arrives, there will be less buy-ins and there, less money for the organizer
It a competition between fairness and lucrative things, and in poker, since the beginning, we know who wins