[OFFICIAL] PokerStars MTT Thread
10-21-2016
, 01:30 AM
10-21-2016
, 10:18 AM
I'm re-posting below an original post from RedOak which was originally posted in the Doug Polk thread in relation the recent live changes PokerStars has made to the payout structures but I think the same applies to the current online structures.
PokerStars has somehow managed to create one of the worst payout structures possible in MTTs not only for professionals but also for recreational players. I'm sure it was designed to get more rake overall and I believe it actually got even worse for the professional when they changed it up several months ago and took more money off some of lower final table places and moved it to the top again. Now what we have is basically a structure where the lucky few still win a reasonable amount if they are fortunate enough to make really deep runs to the top few % of places but any body that suffers the variance of having continual deep runs that just fall short over a reasonable period of time are going to experience much worse variance than in the prior Star's structure.
Some payout structure with consideration to what is listed in the post below is what I believe is best for everyone.
PokerStars has somehow managed to create one of the worst payout structures possible in MTTs not only for professionals but also for recreational players. I'm sure it was designed to get more rake overall and I believe it actually got even worse for the professional when they changed it up several months ago and took more money off some of lower final table places and moved it to the top again. Now what we have is basically a structure where the lucky few still win a reasonable amount if they are fortunate enough to make really deep runs to the top few % of places but any body that suffers the variance of having continual deep runs that just fall short over a reasonable period of time are going to experience much worse variance than in the prior Star's structure.
Some payout structure with consideration to what is listed in the post below is what I believe is best for everyone.
Quote:
The tables below show how flatter payouts can lower a pro's ROI. It looks at the 2010 WSOP main event with 7319 players. If you were an average player your ROI would simply be the -6% rake. This is based on a model that you get your money all in on a 50-50 coin flip. If you were twice as likely to win vs. an average player, then your ROI would be 41% and you would get your money in as a 52.77% favorite on average. If you were 3x as likely to win vs. an avg. player your ROI would be 80% and you would get your money in as a 54.47% fav. on avg. And your ROI would be 117% if you were 4x more likely to win vs. an avg. player and you got your money in as a 55.70% favorite on average.
The actual payout to 1st was $8.9 mil. The A,B,C,D columns show flatter alternatives. If you were 3x more likely to win, and 1st was cut down to $6.2 mil. your ROI would only fall to 71% from 80%. But your variance goes down too as shown in the 2nd table. If you had no top 9 finishes, your ROI would be -1% under the actual pay of $8.9 mil, but you would still have a +7% ROI under the flatter B payout of $6.2 mil.
The final table shows how rare it is to make the top 36. For example, as a 3x to win player with an 80% ROI, you would only make the final table once every 356 years vs once every 2440 years for an average player assuming a 7319 player field.
There needs to be a balance between the desires of the pros and amateurs. I feel 10% payout is too snug and 20% is too loose. Therefore I think 15% for now is a good compromise with a 1.5x min cash. (12.5% would be ok too with say a 1.75x min cash) However, I still feel the amount paid to 1st place in 95%+ of tournaments is still too high. From the 2010 WSOP Main event below, I think choice B is the best with $6.2 mil going to 1st vs the actual pay of $8.9 mil. (B would also add 2% to the pool or over $1 mil in tax savings) With the new WSOP 15% payouts in 2016, that $8.9 mil to 1st would be around $8.2 mil now. So still lots of room to trim from the top. Payouts have been way too top heavy for years and so it is a challenge to get them to levels they should be without creating player expectation "sticker shock". But hopefully they will begin to fall to get in line to where they should be.
RedOak
The actual payout to 1st was $8.9 mil. The A,B,C,D columns show flatter alternatives. If you were 3x more likely to win, and 1st was cut down to $6.2 mil. your ROI would only fall to 71% from 80%. But your variance goes down too as shown in the 2nd table. If you had no top 9 finishes, your ROI would be -1% under the actual pay of $8.9 mil, but you would still have a +7% ROI under the flatter B payout of $6.2 mil.
The final table shows how rare it is to make the top 36. For example, as a 3x to win player with an 80% ROI, you would only make the final table once every 356 years vs once every 2440 years for an average player assuming a 7319 player field.
There needs to be a balance between the desires of the pros and amateurs. I feel 10% payout is too snug and 20% is too loose. Therefore I think 15% for now is a good compromise with a 1.5x min cash. (12.5% would be ok too with say a 1.75x min cash) However, I still feel the amount paid to 1st place in 95%+ of tournaments is still too high. From the 2010 WSOP Main event below, I think choice B is the best with $6.2 mil going to 1st vs the actual pay of $8.9 mil. (B would also add 2% to the pool or over $1 mil in tax savings) With the new WSOP 15% payouts in 2016, that $8.9 mil to 1st would be around $8.2 mil now. So still lots of room to trim from the top. Payouts have been way too top heavy for years and so it is a challenge to get them to levels they should be without creating player expectation "sticker shock". But hopefully they will begin to fall to get in line to where they should be.
RedOak
10-21-2016
, 04:20 PM
10-22-2016
, 05:16 AM
10-24-2016
, 04:01 AM
10-24-2016
, 08:43 AM
Yeah bet stars is also totally Meh for the poker climate but what can we do. These ****s came in wanting to make a profit on us and realised that poker they didn't make half of what they could make through sports betting spin and go's 
mtts will always live. Though stars offerings will always fall whilst other sites will jump on the chance to offer those games
mtts will always live. Though stars offerings will always fall whilst other sites will jump on the chance to offer those games
10-24-2016
, 08:55 AM
10-24-2016
, 05:38 PM
10-24-2016
, 06:08 PM
10-24-2016
, 06:13 PM
10-24-2016
, 09:29 PM
10-24-2016
, 11:42 PM
10-25-2016
, 12:17 PM