You’d be closer in analogy if instead of the table “forfeiting” the blinds, the random table had everyone put in 2BB preflop as a splash pot. Antes aren’t “forfeited” they are redistributed at that same table.

Ok. Everyone at a random table pays extra "bonus" antes. I continue to fail to understand why you consider hands won as an applicable factor when analyzing structure. Nowhere in Arnold Snyder's tournament structure formula do you plug in hand win rate. Nowhere in plog's tournament structure analysis tool do you plug in hand win rate. Nowhere in any structure analysis tool I have ever seen do you plug in hand win rate. Yet all of these tools consider antes and blind sizes, which as you have mentioned, remain on the table.

Hand win rate is an unknowable factor. If your hand win rate happens to be extremely high, the structure is virtually irrelevant. But if your hand win rate is extremely low, that's when the structure is important. So again, when analyzing BBA structures, it doesn't matter whether the antes disappear into thin air or remain on the table. Its the size of the antes/blinds that matters. And with BBA, some people are paying a higher price per hand dealt by luck of the table draw.

No. A table would be MUCH more disadvantaged if the TD came over and took a BB off of everyone's stack than they would if the TD came over and said "OK, this hand everyone put a BB into the pot to start the hand." So your analogy was very flawed, and I was pointing that out.

Saying that there are more chips to be won isn't the same as saying "hey if you win every hand, the structure doesn't matter." You have to factor in all outcomes, not just losing hands though. If you were told you were going to play an orbit at an 8 handed table as a short stack, and asked if you want to play 500/1000/1000 or 500/1000/100, some people ALWAYS focus on that you will lose an extra 200 chips in 500/1000/1000 if you fold the whole orbit, but ignore that you will win an extra 200 chips if you steal. Obv we won't know if we will win 0, 1, 2, 3, or even 8 hands. The point is you should factor all outcomes in, not just the worst case. In 1 of the 9 possible outcomes, 500/1000/100 is better for you. In 1 they are equal. In 7 of 9 possible outcomes, 500/1000/1000 is better for you.

Again, I have never seen a structure analysis methodology which takes hand outcomes into account, whether that includes best case or something less than best case scenarios. All that is considered is orbit costs, level lengths, etc. The purpose is to analyze the structure, not the skill or luck of players, since these are obviously variable.

But if you have come up with some sort of structure evaluation formula which takes hand outcomes into account, I'd be happy to consider it if its a valid analysis.