Its not PH that's patenting it.. its some nebulous company with a website...

http://quantumtournaments.com/about/

I assume its run by the user who posted the lengthy description above. And I doubt its actually patented. If it were they would display Patent #s. It might be patent pending, though I'm not sure something like this is actually patentable. In any case, they do have a Trademark for "QUANTUM RELOAD" which is used by various casinos in exchange for some consideration (ie money, advertising, etc).

I'm not sure I agree with your supposition that day 1A entrants need to contribute the same amount to the prizepool as other day 1's. Day 1A gets fewer chips and pays a larger vig, so right off the bat were' talking about a structure which leads to an uneven playing field.

As for the merits of this structure, I don't have a strong opinion. However, I believe it is misplaced within the Goliath series. This sort of structure seems like it would work best when players have few choices... when buying in for less and paying a larger vig/getting fewer chips in order to compete for a larger prizepool might be attractive. However, there are a number of price-points/guarantees within the Goliath series itself which seem to be of far better value than the Quantum events, never mind what is available outside of PH. This seems like the sort of structure a casino might use in order to drive some business during a slower period, not during the busiest time of the year.

And, in general, I agree the format is far too complicated. And furthermore, it is just another example of the trend in poker to exchange a level competitive balance for a variety of gimmicks intent on making casinos a little more money. As a businessman, I'm not opposed to this concept, in general, but if it becomes the norm in poker instead of just the exception, then the competitive "sport" we all love will be dead.. relegated to the status of just another way to gamble in a casino and pay the house an arm and a leg to do so.

I wish TDs and casinos would try harder to figure out how to make more money on poker (technology?) without destroying the competitive balance in the activity.

The Quantum is not that complicated. You just don't like the appearance of an imbalance. Like someone said, register in flight A and get the best odds. If you don't make it, you can quit or move onto the next level. Pretty simple.

Every day one entrant should contribute the exact same amount to prizepool.

Only difference should be odds of advancing.

Example $100 people 1/10 advance.

$200 1/5 advance

Direct buy $1000.

Any other formula benefits one or more of the buyin types.

<sidetrack>

I did crack up when he averaged the buyins using his wonky math, got 1266 and 1888 and instead of making it an even amount by making the day 2 buyin 1266+84=1350 and 1888+112=2000 he was like "Nah, screw the players more and round down" and made the day 2 buyins 1250+100 and 1850+150. Too good.

</sidetrack>

Be interesting to see who pays $350 for a tournament where only 15% get a $1,000 entry. That said I cannot see any reason not to play the first flight.

I found the patent. It's number 8,480,089 if any of you are dorks like me and want to look it up on the USPTO website. I'll ignore questions as to whether it's a valid patent (such as whether it passes the non-obviousness test). But on a quick review, the patented method is just for having two stages, with players buying in directly to Day 2 getting the same number of chips as the average stack of Day 1 survivors. No one here has a problem with that concept. Like I said earlier, it's basically a satellite but where your chip count at the end of the satellite means something for the tournament going forward. And as I described above, it is entirely possible to do this correctly and fairly. That's the frustrating part.

The problem is with the buy-ins for different Day 1's, for which there is no methodology described in the patent claims, and which is flat-out mathematically incorrect. The reason to point this out (and not just to avoid the tournament) is in part because Chris has been particularly responsive to the 2+2 community, and PH stands to get burned or embarrassed by doing this improperly. And I think it's a pretty easy fix, if you just use mathematically defensible Day 1 buy-ins like I described above. But it also seems appropriate to give information to players who might consider these events.

Here's the meat of the problem:

This is wrong. First, the average value of a Day 2 seat should be identical for all 3 starting flights. That point has been made already. But second, this "average value" calculation would only be correct if you have exactly the same number of seats advancing from each starting flight. Which is absurd, especially since you have structured this so that playing Day 1 is the only starting flight that makes mathematical sense. Anyone who bothers to run the numbers will play that flight and avoid the other starting days. So then you imbalance the Day 1 field to favor the first starting flight, which lowers your "average value" in this analysis and makes it so now the Day 2 direct buy-ins are overpaying.

I know these are lengthy posts, and I apologize. Whoever came up with this likely had the best intentions, but did the math based on some faulty assumptions rather than understanding how tournaments actually work. Chris, I'd be happy to suggest mathematically sensible buyins and bonuses for your consideration if you want to message me.

A suggestion for buyins and bonuses for the 150k, assuming you want to keep the same buyins:
100+30 (1 in 12 get through, start with 8500 chips), qualifiers get $200 bonus
200+40 (1 in 7 get through, start with 14500 chips), qualifiers get $400 bonus
305+45 (1 in 5 get through, start with 20000 chips), qualifiers get $525 bonus
Day 2 buyins are 1000+100 (or +whatever), get 100k chips.

Any flight where the lowest level buyin is 1/3 of the high buyin is going to be tougher to make even on day 2, I would suggest making the buyin 150+whatever for the lowest level, and doing it this way instead.
150+30 (1 in 10 get through, start with 10000 chips), qualifiers get $300 bonus
200+40 (1 in 8 get through, start with 12500 chips), qualifiers get $400 bonus
305+45 (1 in 6 get through, start with 16500 chips), qualifiers get $630 bonus
Day 2 buyins are 1200+whatever, get 100k chips

For the 300k
200+40 (1 in 12 get through, start with 10k chips), qualifiers get $400 bonus
305+45 (1 in 8 get through, start with 15k chips), qualifiers get $440 bonus
400+50 (1 in 7 get through, start with 17k chips), qualifiers get $800 bonus
Day 2 buyins are 2000+whatever, get 120k chips.

I'm just going to come out and say that I think quantum tournaments are a bad idea and they're bad for poker. I normally like and embrace change and hold a fairly liberal outlook on life. But this is one area that just doesn't need to be changed. When you enter a tournament, everyone starts with the same chip stack and pays the same amount. It's intrinsic to the format we know as tournament poker. The idea that any Joe off the street can pay the same amount of money to enter and sit next to a professional is part of the appeal of tournament poker in general. Circumventing this is just a bad idea. I will not be entering any tournaments where players can pay a different amount from other players and receive different amount of chips.

Every re-entry and rebuy already circumvents this, as those with deep pockets often play a different game than those without..

I'll add my 2 cents. I think the quantum tournaments are a good idea. They are the equivalent of a satellite into a bigger tournament that allows players to choose the buyin level of the satellite, it also makes the satellite aspect play more like a normal tournament since your chip stack at the end matters and you get the equivalent of a min cash so you are kinda freerolling the larger tournament if you make it through.

Casinos near me don't run them so unfortunately i haven't had a chance to play in one of them. I will be in vegas during this one however i will not be playing as i would prefer to play the middle tier buyin as I am comfortable at that level and would have better odds of advancing, however I will not be playing it due to the unfair contribution level to the prize pool.

Excellent post by BillyBizzle, if the buyins were structured the way he laid them out, I would play.

reg for all events opens May 26th on the Mezz at Ph

starting May 26th reg opens for all events

Hi. First of all, thanks for having this great series!
Question: last years thread had a discussion on whether 10, or 15%, in the money is preferred. Is there any news on what will be followed?
Just to give my preference, that would be 15%.

Btw. Sorry if it was already discussed, and I missed it.

not announced officially but unofficially officially I can confirm off the record that we will use a 15% payout model for everything besides our daily $75 turbos and nightly $20 rebuy.

Great, thnx!

Hi Chris,

Two suggestions for changes to the schedule, for what it's worth:

June 9th Dealer's Choice event - perhaps you could move it to June 2, 3, or 4th? There is not much going on mixed-game wise early in your schedule, and these dates would put your dealer's choice event right before the $1500 WSOP dealer's choice event on June 5th and attract that same crowd.

June 13th HORSE event - perhaps you could move that later in the schedule, as there are also not a lot of mixed events toward the end of your schedule. Perhaps something like June 29, July 3rd, July 6th, July 8 - 11th?

Thanks for listening.

With all due respect, please don't go about making changes a few weeks after the schedule was finalised. Many of us have been building our schedules over the past few weeks since the bulk of series schedules were published.

^^ this! Add the feedback to your continuity binder for next year, and press on.

And you did a mighty fine job! I will be playing quite some events at PH due to the nice schedule combined with the WSOP and Venetian.

Forgot I had an update to this, to make it consistent between the two tourneys:
For the 300k
225+40 (1 in 10 get through, start with 10k chips), qualifiers get $450 bonus
305+45 (1 in 8 get through, start with 12.5k chips), qualifiers get $640 bonus
450+50 (1 in 6 get through, start with 16.5k chips), qualifiers get $900 bonus
Day 2 buyins are 1800+whatever, get 100k chips.

Given the general lack of response other than "This is what the tournament is" I was planning on waiting another week or so before seeing if we could get this some more visibility.

Does anyone recall if the Goliath events use shuffle machines and if the NLH tourneys are typically 9 or 10-handed?

No shuffle machines (100% positive)

Ten handed play as I recall (80% positive)

thanks.

Is parking at PH free for all, or hotel guests only?

How about at the Rio?

I don't think the PH will join in the pay for parking because the parking garage also serves the Miracle Mile mall and I would imagine they don't want to drive business away from that.