I've updated my S-Points analysis site with data from the 4 Vegas casinos that have posted full structures for their 2021 tournament series:

https://www.rainbowspuppiessunshine....ournaments.php


I will update my comparison page on Monday which lists how each casino is doing overall compared to the others, as well as to its 2019 offerings (since 2020 didn't really have equivalents):

https://www.rainbowspuppiessunshine....c/analysis.php


Please use this thread to let me know of any mistakes I made, ask questions or let me know where I can get Aria and Orleans structures.

Nice! Much appreciated.

excellent, thanks

Awesome - TYVM

Thanks Plog
I use your formula all the time. Big help

Thank you. Will you be adding Orleans series?

Plog,
I looked at your website and your rankings of all events. You certainly put a lot of work in doing all of this. What do you get out of it?

I looked at the Venetian $800 on Sept 28 which you rated 112. I plugged in the numbers but level 18 had a cost of 20k but starting stack was 40k and so 100% minutes had not been reached yet. If you used 18 levelsx40 min= 720 for 100% minutes, the rating is only 87. It is 91 if you goto 760 minutes. So I don't know how you got to 112 listed here
https://www.rainbowspuppiessunshine....ournaments.php




https://www.venetianlasvegas.com/con...tructure_3.pdf

They are now up. Just Aria is outstanding--if you know where I can find these please post a link.

Chicks. Fame. Adoring fans. Finally the love of my father.

Work gets slow but I'm still stuck at my desk, so I spend a few hours getting data.

For the tournament you mentioned (Venetian #3, Structure Sheet: https://www.venetianlasvegas.com/con...tructure_3.pdf) the 100% Mins value is 840 which will push the S-Points to 112.

Since I've been doing this, the Venetian always has a few structure sheets that seem to include incomplete data. The first year I did this I asked them about it and they said the structures continue on in the pattern they establish. So you divided everything in the last level of the sheet by 10, find the prior level that has that data and then continue on from there for further levels.

So for the structure sheet I posted above, level 18 is 8000 - 4000 -8000. Divide that all by 10 and you see level 8 is 800 -400 - 800. Which means you multiply level 9 by 10 to get level 19 (10000 - 5000 - 10000), level 10 by 10 to get level 20 (15000 - 5000 - 15000), level 11 by 10 to get level 21 (15000 - 10000 - 15000) which equals the starting stack size of 40000 giving 840 (40*21) as the 100% mins.

Okay, that makes sense. I give you a lot of credit for the hard work you put into your s-points method. Personally, I am partial to the Skill rating method described in Arnold Synder's book "Poker Tournament Formula". He rates every level at the start of the tournament and bases the skill level on how long it would take one to blind off a starting stack to zero. Your method has its first data point at level 6, then level 10, then 14, then 18. Well in a 60 min per level wsop event, by level 6, you likely have over 50% of the field already busted. By level 10, 70% are gone and by level 18 90%+ are gone. So since so many never get to those levels, the structure at the very start should be the one to be focused on.

For example, your S-points for the $800 Venetian has a rating of 112 and the rating of a $1k wsop seniors is 133. yet under the skill rating method, the skill rating of the Venetian is deeper at 57 vs 44 for the wsop. The blind off time of the venetian is 7.59 hours and "only" 6.63 hours for the wsop. so the venetian in my opinion is a slower structure, but your method gives that nod to the wsop event.

+1 I'm a bit old to be a Fan Boy but I guess in this case I qualify. Really do appreciate the effort.

https://static.boydgaming.net/orlean...Structures.pdf

RedOak--If you want to pick 2 tournaments to discuss that demonstrates a weakness in my system, I am all for it. Name the 2, demonstrate the weakness and be sure to define any of your metrics (e.g. "blind off time").

However, I think it boils down to--I don't think the first levels of a tournament matter as much as you do. Tournaments aren't won there and the antes/blinds don't contribute to decision making as much as they do in later rounds. A first round of 50-100-50 is negligibly better than a first round of 100-200-100 even if it pushes all subsequent rounds back one.

Below are 2 to compare. The WSOP 25k on Oct 2 with your S-Points of 135 and the $800 Venetian on Sept 28 with your S-Points 112. Your method would rate the WSOP event with a slower structure. But Synder's Skill rating method rates the WSOP event at 42.25 and the Venetian event at 57.56. I agree with the Venetian being slower. At 30 hands per hour, if one never played a hand, it would take 390 minutes to blind off your stack in the WSOP event, but it would take 455.2 minutes to blind off in the Venetian event. Thus Venetian has a slower structure. I don't understand why your 100% minutes benchmark has any meaning. If your stack gets to even 20% of the cost of 1 round that is allin or fold territory, and you would be blinded off well before then. At 100% minutes in the WSOP event, if you were allowed to blind off into negative chips, you would be at -13.64 times your starting stack in the red, but you would only be -8.705 times your starting stack in the red for the Venetian event at the 100% minutes mark. Early rounds are important, especially at No-Limit. You have much more play in the early rounds. Yet your method takes first reading at level 6, and 2nd at level 10. At level 10 in the WSOP event, each round already costs 20% of one's stack. Just a 3x bb raise then a 3bb c-bet will commit amost 50% of your stack at that level, so there is already very little play left at level 10. Let alone level 14 and 18 where your next data points are derived. Your 100% minutes takes 1020 minutes to hit in the WSOP event but only 840 to hit in the Venetian event. That is why you rate the WSOP event as slower. But again, the 100% minutes is a meaningless data point. Stack blind off time is much more relevant.

Here's links to the structure sheets RedOak is talking about if anyone wants to play along at home:

Venetian #3: https://www.venetianlasvegas.com/con...tructure_3.pdf

WSOP #6: https://www.wsop.com/pdfs/structures...4865_19733.pdf

RedOak--you used the wrong big blind data for the Venetian level 2, 3 & 13. And that's a criticism I have of that system--it takes so much data to score a structure. Criticism #2 is that in the end you get 2 scores--you gotta make it easy for people to use mechanically and intellectually. Nobody wants to type in 108 pieces of data just to compare 2 tournaments and in the end have 1 be higher in Skill Score but lower in Patience score and have no idea which tournament is overall better.

I think they serve the same purpose, they help relate starting stack size to the blinds. Mine does that without having to assume any other data but that which is on the structure sheet. Yours is predicated on an outside variable--hands per hour--which has nothing to do with the structure. Can you fix your blind data, post the correct results of your system and then run both scores twice more, changing the hands per hour to 25 and 20? I'd be interested to see how much that variable factors into the calculation.

This is great .
THANKS

I used the correct numbers in calculating the skill rating for the Venetian. so nothing changed there. still 57.56 vs 42.25. (actually, 42.68 see below) The skill rating is just the number of hours till blinded to zero and then squared. So 390 minutes in the 25k is 6.5 hours. 6.5^2=42.25 skill rating. Only the skill rating is used to compare events. Changing the blinds in the spreadsheet posted still had -6200 at level 12 for the Venetian event, but at level 21, the starting stack was now -8.755x instead. (-350,200 chip stack) Virtually the same. I fixed it in the image below. The hands per hour are relative and not meaningful but simply used as underlying input in the formula. So if I changed it to 25 or 20, then the skill rating would go down for each on the same relative basis. Now for online events, the formula uses 50 hands per hour and the skill rating goes up even though the blindoff time declines. But since you are getting in more hands, then more skill is involved. So since 50 is 1.66x 30. The blindoff time is multiplied by 1.66 and then squared to get the skill rating. So the $25k event at wsop that takes 392 minutes to reach blind off to zero live, is recalculated to show only 302.4 minutes till blindoff. you then multiplied this by 1.66 if it were an online event since now 50 hands can be played. So 392/60=6.53 hours. 6.53^2= 42.68 skill rating. (my first chart had it at 42.25 and was incorrect). So at 50 hands per hour, it now only takes 302.4 minutes to be blinded to zero. So 302.4/60= 5.04 hours and (5.04x1.66)^2= 70.56 skill rating. So even though blindoff time is less at 5.04 hours vs 6.53, the skill rating went up as 50 hands per hour were played vs. 30. And that makes sense. The more hands you play, the more skillful play can be employed.

You're drowning me in numbers, jumping around and making assumptions I can't follow. You said hands per hour wasn't meaningful but then said its both part of the formula and changing it for online tournaments effects the Skill score.

I don't follow your specifics, but I understand that your argument is that the Venetian's starting stack is more significant than the WSOP. I think because of the level length, difference the WSOP's starting stack is more significant.

I updated my comparison page so you can see how this year's tournaments stack up against 2019:

https://www.rainbowspuppiessunshine....c/analysis.php

@plog

Thank you for your hard work !!!