https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4_...ew?usp=sharing

updated link for the $300K Quantum

No dinner break if the day is only going to last 12 hours or less. If you nits get hungry order something from the table or eat whatever the heck you bring in that backpack of yours.

+1 for dinner breaks

+1

I don't uderstand it at all. I love the idea of quantum tournements, but this is nothing but a trainwreck...

Can you please give your thought process for why you want the $350 guys to contribute $1633 to the prize pool while the $130 guys only contribute $600 and the 1K guys only contributing $900???

They get more chips. It's sorta like an add-on except the money goes to the prize pool instead of the staff.

Then I would like to play the $350, only pay $130 and start with 10k instead of 15k in chips.

Agree.

I would like to see a dinner break. It's along day playing and like Pokerella said, everyone eating at the table is not what you want. Just my two cents.

Why can't it be 10 - 11 (or even 12) hours of play with a 1 hour dinner break, btw?

It certainly can be. If we go w dinner breaks I'd go with 12 hours of play plus a 1 hour dinner break.

I don't mean to pile on, Chris, and my instinct tends to be to stick up for the tournament directors because they take lots of crap on these forums from folks who think they are experts. But the math on the quantum buy-ins does seem to be off. I think this is a cool idea, so I want to see it work. Here's your problem. The folks who make Day 2 through the higher buy-in Day 1's end up contributing a disproportionate amount to the prizepool. For this to work fairly among flights, you need the Day 1 buy-in (ignoring fees) to bear the same proportion to the Day 2 direct buy-in (incl. fees) plus the $500 bonus as the percentage of players advancing from that Day 1.

Using your $300k Gtd as an example. It's $1800 to buy in directly to Day 2 for 100k chips. Your Thursday Day 1 says 10% of the field will advance, and they start with 10k starting stacks. So the average Day 2 starting stack for Day 2 survivors will be 100k, the same as the direct buy-in. Which is great. But the contribution from the Day 1 prize pool should also equal the direct buy-in amount. Since you're paying each Day 1 survivor $500 cash, you need to have $1800 + $500 = $2300 from the prize pool for Day 1 for each player who makes Day 2. With 10% of Thursday players advancing, the buy-in for each should be $230, plus your fees. You have listed a $240 buy-in, which implies a very low-juice $230+10 (4.2% fees).

But now look at Friday's Day 1. Now 12% of the field advances (1 in 8.333), and with 12k starting stacks we again end with a nice 100k average chip stack for survivors. Again, you need to have $2300 from the Day 1 prizepool for each advancing player ($1800+$500). With one advancing player from each 8.333 entries, the buyin should be $276 ($2300/8.3333), plus your fees. You have listed a $350 buyin, which implies a $276+74 breakdown. We've gone from 4.2% to 21.1% fees.

Now Saturday's Day 1. You say 15% of the field advances (1 in 6.667), with 15k starting stacks for the 100k average surviving stack. Again, we need $2300 for each surviving player. To cover that, we need a $345 buyin from each player, plus your fees. With a listed $450 buyin, that's a breakdown of $345+105. Which is 23.3% in fees.

To fix this, you need to either use buyins of $230, $276, and $345 (plus appropriate fees for each), or you need to change the percentages of advancing players AND the chip stacks. For example, let's say you have a $230+40 buyin for one of the starting days. In that scenario, you get the needed $2300 from every 10 entries, so you should advance 10% of the field and start with 10k stacks. But to have a comparable fee percentage, the next step up should be $276+39=$315 for the 12% field, not $350, and $345+40=$395 for the 15% field.

Alternatively, if you have a $440 total buyin, you could do something like $380+60, with starting stacks of 16,500, and just under 1 in 6 players advancing.

Sorry for the lengthy posts, but two more quick things. One, the amounts you're paying people who make it through more than one Day 1 don't make sense. You're overpaying at $1500 in Event 1 (should be $1000+400), and underpaying at $2000 in Event 47 (should be $1800+500).

Two, I looked back at your Event 1 sheet and the numbers are even more disproportionate than what I described for Event 47. If your direct buy-in for Day 2 is $1000, with a $400 bonus for advancing, and your Friday buy-in is $200+40, you should be advancing 1/7 of the field and have starting stacks around 14k, not advancing 12% with 12k stacks. And at $305+45, you should be advancing 1 in 4.6 players, and you're not even advancing 1 in 6.6.

Someone made the comment that the extra money goes to the prizepool, so it's not juice. Which may be true. But that doesn't address the issue of the gross disparity in equity among starting flights. If you play the higher buy-in flights, at best, you are subsidizing the prize pool for the folks who played the lowest buy-in. At worst, that money isn't making it to the Day 2 prizepool and becomes hidden juice.

Appreciate your time to look at this and provide insight. And that goes for everyone on this thread. It amazes me how much time everyone puts into studying the events and planning ahead.

As far as the event specific perspectives all we did was take the Quantum model that has been used in So. Cal and replicated at Ph. Kessler has recently pledged support for the updated version of Quantum and I'd like to see what he has to say about the perspectives you have offered.

Thanks Chris. And I haven't played those SoCal tourneys, so it may be that this is just how they're done. It strikes me that it should basically work like a multitable satellite, but is better than a normal satellite because the amount of chips you end up with has real value going forward in the tournament. That's the premise of my comments above. Maybe I'm way off base. I'll be interested in Chainsaw's take as well.

Just spoke with Mo and Kevin from Quantum and they will be responding shortly!

The amount from each advanced flight to the prizepool should be the same.

Chris, how are things with registering with PH tourneys while there is the poker madness of the Collussus? Can you pre reg for them?

Any info on late registration for all events?

Quantum Tournaments is a patented concept that allows players to enter a tournament on different days, with different buy-ins, and different tournament chip stacks, with different amount of players qualifying on those days. This concept allows the smaller bankroll players the opportunity to compete for a larger prize pool, normally structured to the higher buy-in tournaments.

The way we structure our tournaments is different for every casino. In some casino’s Quantum will put premiums on specific levels especially on Day 2 Buy-ins. Why do you ask? Some casinos have a larger player base and some casinos have more/less affluent players. The structure can also be slightly different based on the dollar amount of the buy-in. In some cases the larger dollar amount of buy-in has additional levels and additional time of blinds. Quantum’s Day 2 structure is also longer to adjust for the larger buy-in and previous levels.

In order to set a schedule and structure Quantum Tournaments will work with the tournament director to suit an estimated player attendance at the location. For example: A smaller casinos Day 1 flights are 5 to 6 hours. Bigger field casino’s Day 1 flights are 8 to 12 hours. This is why we consider premiums or discounts for flights and Day 2 buy-ins.

All additional monies are added to the prize pool.

We have since taken a standard model and will use this formula for future tournaments:

For $150k GTD at Planet Hollywood

Day 1A- $100 Buy-in, 10% adv. = 1 player advance for every 10 players
$100 x 10 (number of players per table) = $1,000 / 1 (adv. %) = $1000
True value of day 2 seat is $1,000 subtract $300 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $700
Day 1B- $200 Buy-in, 12% adv. = 1.2 players advance for every 10 players
200 x 10 (number of players per table) = $2,000 / 1.2 (adv. %) = $1,667
True value of day 2 seat is $1,667 subtract $300 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $1,367
Day 1C- $305 Buy-in, 15% adv. = 1.5 players advance for every 10 players
$305 x 10 (number of players per table) = $3,050 / 1.5 (adv. %) = $2,033
True value of day 2 seat is $2,033 subtract $300 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $1,733

Average of actual value for Day 2 Seats of all 3 Flights
$700 + 1,367 + 1,733 = $3,800/3= $1,266

Day 2 Seat value on avg. would be $1,266.
Day 2 direct buy-in should be $1,250 +100 = $1,350

For $300k GTD at Planet Hollywood

Day 1A- $200 Buy-in, 10% adv. = 1 player advance for every 10 players
$200 x 10 (number of players per table) = $2,000 / 1 (adv. %) = $2,000
True value of day 2 seat is $2,000 subtract $500 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $1,500

Day 1B- $300 Buy-in, 12% adv. = 1.2 players advance for every 10 players
$300 x 10 (number of players per table) = $3,000 / 1.2 (adv. %) = $2,500
True value of day 2 seat is $2,500 subtract $500 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $2,000

Day 1C- $400 Buy-in, 15% adv. = 1.5 players advance for every 10 players
$400 x 10 (number of players per table) = $4,000 / 1.5 (adv. %) = $2666
True value of day 2 seat is $2666 subtract $500 bonus for qualifying = actual value of seat $2,166

Average of actual value for Day 2 Seats of all 3 Flights
$1,500 + $2,000 + $2,166 = $5,666/3 = $1,888

Day 2 Seat value on avg. would be $1,888.
Day 2 direct buy-in should be 1,850+150=$2,000

We hope this should answer any questions you might have. Thank you

Change of subject, but can one register for any event in advance at PH, particularly for multi-flight events?

So basically what you're saying is that my math is correct, thanks for that. Although your structure and the structure sheet that was posted by PH were different in several buyins and the amount that is awarded to the qualifiers of day 2.

You did not answer the primary question that I asked:
Why would anyone play 1c of the 150k guaranteed tournament? Why wouldn't they just directly buy into day 2 for 3x the buyin and get significantly more value (even though by doing that they could be losing significant value as well)?

The issue here is that you think that taking the average of the 3 amounts and letting that determine the day 2 buy-in is fine. What everyone will agree with is that it is not fine to just average the amounts and let it be the day 2 buyin, because every day 1 survivor should be contributing the same amount to the prizepool. There is no reason to have the day 3 players play and then immediately lose as much as $1033 in value (if you had 1000 players on 1a, 0 on 1b, and 7 on 1c, that's approximately what they would lose) as a result of making day 2 and playing against players who contributed a different amount. The different field sizes and different buyins *SHOULD NOT MATTER* because the amount of qualifiers from each flight should be proportional to the buyin. Your system inherently does not do this, which is a complete and utter ripoff to someone who is not aware of what you're doing.

Very simply, you got Allen and me to agree on something (see his post about 6 posts up). We agree on almost nothing. This should concern you.

This needs to be fixed rather than explained. Please examine what you're trying to do here and come up with a coherent set of buyins and structures that is fair and equitable to all players, not just the ones that play on 1a, instead of just throwing crap at the wall and hoping that it sticks.

+1 to all that Billy Bizzle said

If the structure is not set in stone at this point, i strongly think you should fix it!

Taking the 150K as an example, letting qualifiers from all flights contributing $900 to the prize pool seems reasonable (including day 2 buyins that can stay at 900+100).

A quick and dirty fix trying to make it somewhat fair while minimizing changes, is to just adjust the bonus for making day 2. 1A get a $100 bonus, 1B get a $750 bonus, and 1C get a $1100 bonus.

This Quantum tournament is over-complicated, badly designed and executed.

Better to keep it simple with vanilla MTTs like the Wynn for example. You are going to get lots of rec players busting out of WSOP tournaments looking for something else to play, lots will be scratching their heads, wondering how does this work and what's the point.

And lol at patenting it. Good luck with your future business, you might need it.

Why all the complaining? If you've identified what you think is a better value than what other players pay, enter that way and play it!

Not complaining, think most posters are trying to give constructive feedback. It is a serious problem that could give quantum mtts a bad reputation (I like the idea of quantum mtts and would like them to thrive). I like PH and appreciate the way Chris listens to the players and I would like the series to be as successful as possible (this quantum mess is not helping with that...)