1- antes are a pain in the neck and back for dealers and players. ante sir, ante sir, ante sir, over and over again. why not eliminate the antes and have 3 blinds. small, small, big. starts out 25-25-50. more action, no more ****kin antes, and because of the action i think the tourney doesnt go 14 or 15 hours, so more older people would play. why not try it ??

2- theres usually a problem with the final table of 10. the tourney pays 9 so lets each give the 10th place guy 25 bucks each. one prick says no so the 10th place goes home empty after 10 hours of play. why do the casinos put us in that position?? either have the final table 9 or pay 10. it would eliminate 90 percent of the problem . not 100 percent. nothing is 100 percent in poker. not even pocket aces. against 2-7 off.

any thoughts ??

Pocket rockets Vs. Deuce Seven Off equals 87.24% but not 100%

Antes speed up tournaments. Second idea seems fine.

1. absolutely not
2. good idea

1. antes def speed up a tournament
2. we do this at the local charity room I play at...especially since the bubble boy is always at the final table so we all throw in 5 bucks or whatev so they get their BI back

Norman Chad would agree with idea #1.

both ideas sound great to me

another cool idea would be to take all the duces out of the deck so nobody can get 2-7 off. or make 2-7 off equalivent to AA.

^or make aces wild

just go allin and lose before antes begin and you will avoid this problem

1. Allen should be able to tell us if it is a good idea or not.

2. Choke the guy into submission until he agrees to be a good sport and cough up the $25.

He doesn't want to get rid of antes, just make them a third blind and speed things up even more.

I've actually never liked the idea of "let's throw something in for the bubble boy". All it does is create a new bubble boy, who apparently no one gives a **** about. Plus, if it's something where everyone throws in say $50 bucks, then the guy who finishes last in the money ends up giving up a much larger share of his winnings to the bubble boy than the #1 guy.

Just doesn't make sense to me. Someone has to be the bubble boy. Extending it by one doesn't change the fact that some guy just missed the money, or just missed getting his buyin back. Plus it can actually change the play of the game, as the short stack who would bubble now is guaranteed his buy in back, and doesn't care so starts shoving with ATCs. Same way at the WSOP how so many bust out once the bubble is burst.

It sucks to be the bubble boy, but why should that be the one area of poker where the other players feel sorry for the loser?

op you realize adding another small blind does not at all equal to a table of antes, right?

I thought you were going to suggest a button ante, which would be "worse" than normal antes (because of the shuffling of seats in a tournament and fish perception) but effectively equal in terms of avg dead money per hand pre action.

It is no far off.

Your talking about a 50 dif if 25 antes come in at 200/400

1. No. Antes it means you have a number of hands with no cost which would change the play of the tournament.

2. If you do that, what about the 11th person who becomes the bubble?

Idk how it would work in a tourney setting but in high stakes cash games they will often throw an ante on top of the blinds, but instead of every player anteing they have the BB post the ante for every player. Again idk how this would work when everyone is very shortstacked, but its much more efficient then having every person put in the ante.

how would a third blind speed it up even more as compared to antes? not tying to level, flame or be flamed, I'm asking honestly fwiw

Tony you're smart enough to realize the answer to question 1, and I know you've played 100 times the live hands I have. Players, both good and bad, play differently when they are puting money into the pot involuntarily every hand. The ante causes bad players to make that bad preflop call because they've already invested something, the effect of a third blind wouldn't have the same effect on the non thinking players that don't understand the math is the same. But yeah it is obnoxious.

As for question 2 I completely agree, also I hate people tossing the bubble something because (as said earlier in this thread) it just creates a different bubble boy. This one seems inconsequential though.

Ive been meaning to get your book by the way, you're the ****.

small big extra big blind more like it

tony if they start paying 10 then the nits will just want to give 11th $25

1. I love Omaha tourneys because there is no ante.

2. Played a live satty on Thursday night with 35 seats awarded.
With 36 players left a deal was suggested where the price oyf a 36th seat wild be deducted from the other 35 players. Each player was given a red card and a black card to vote with anonymously. Thought it was great way to do it, and saved the usual arguing and shouting matches.

i actually like idea 1 more then 2. Have 2 small blinds and skip ante sounds good to me.

ive done that. causes problems. tk

From an ease point of view it's definitely optimal, the dynamic change is the potential problem.

Ante's on the table every hand cause more action and lead to bigger mistakes from fish as far as I'm concerned, if anyone disagrees feel free to holler.

Having two small blinds definitely changes the dynamic...with 3 players now getting a discount to see the flop (albeit in the worst positions). I don't mind this idea, but just having the btn post an ante for the whole table everytime would keep the dynamic more similar to what it is now and speed up the live ante process.

However BvBvB situations would be new and interesting.