BB ante only is the present & future of tourney poker, get on board or play a different game. Also for a venue like PH, where dealer complaints are common, the BB ante only format should certainly be implemented. Funny, a couple of the same people that complain about the dealers also don't want this format, they fail to see how this helps new and inexperienced dealers.

To my knowledge only about 3 posters have come out against the BB ante system. I'm not sure about the other two, but I wouldn't say I have complained about dealer quality at PH. In fact I think I usually go out of my way to minimize this issue. Of course, that does not mean that the dealer quality at PH has been great, nor does it mean that one cannot compare the dealer quality at PH to other venues. It just means its not necessarily something to complain about. Anyhow, of all the things dealers need to be proficient at in the course of performing their duties, collecting antes is near the bottom. Most dealer mistakes I see have to do with proper control of the deck and proper control of action and have nothing to do with collecting antes.

Anyhow, the statement that the BB ante is the "present" is nearly as laughably erroneous as saying the BB ante "saves a lot of time". There at some venues which have definitely supported it. And there are others which are experimenting. I have yet to see a single BB ante event offered anywhere within 2 hours of where I live, though I don't live near any major venues. If and when BB ante events start becoming the norm, and not just the exception, then I think you will be able to say something. Until then its pure conjecture, based on little more than the desire of some vocal number of players that it be true.

I am guessing I am one of the ones who commented about dealers at PHo, specifically in the O8 event last year (where the one in the first level came across as never having dealt ANY manner of poker, much less a hi-lo flop-based variant and where we did not even get through an orbit in the first level). The ones I had in the Seniors event were certainly competent though taken as a collective whole...

What makes his statement laughable is that he is willing to punt an entire segment of people who have the disposable income that help keep the tournament economy running. I am guessing he is in the under-35 age bracket and fails to grasp that those of us in the over-50 bracket can indeed decide to take our money elsewhere. And, it isn't as though we are seeing people who were clamoring for this change in order TO play a NLHE event...which means that perhaps listening to those who are opposed to the change is in order so as to keep the money in the poker ecosystem...

Tournaments benefit from people who are willing to travel for a specific event and for whom dropping a few grand on an entry (or series of entries) simply isn't a big deal. But when a player elects NOT to travel and drop that money, then the property derives ZERO benefit from having made a change that pisses off players to the point of not traveling and not playing...

I just find it interesting that the strongest proponents of it are almost always arguing for it by citing its weakest benefits... ie ""saving time" or "making things easier for dealers". They never say things like "you know, this does change the game in important ways and here is why those changes are good for players, casinos and the game". It's always the mythical stuff. I would not care to paint the entire pro BB ante crowd with a single brush, but the way its being promoted in these threads by some really has the taste of... "this change is good for me and how I like to play, so everyone needs to accept it." They tend to ignore the arguments I and some others have made about some of the drawbacks of the BB ante, and they certainly dismiss people who oppose it for any reason. It's really kind of a cult-ish attitude by some.

Me: "Smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure smoother structure"
Akashenk: "But really, why do people keep talking about mythical benefits?"

Count me as one of those scratching my head with the bb ante. Was it even a problem to begin with? I actually found that people tanking and taking too long is a way bigger issue than ante collecting. Just my two cents.

Chris,
Once the series gets underway, can you register for any event at anytime, or is there an initial time when registration for a given event opens, like 2 hours before the start? Can i swing by at 2am and register for an event that is happening a week later? Thanks.

I haven't played with BB ante yet but the most appealing facet of it to me is the existence of antes in the early levels. To me, full ring ante-less two card poker is the most boring game around. BB ante from the start makes me way more likely to early reg, as it should for both regs and recs alike in an exponential effect. Earlier entries = more re-entries = bigger fields.

From a game integrity standpoint, ante-less and ante poker are quite different games so it doesn't make such sense to me that tournaments are played 90% under one paradigm but the first 10% under a different paradigm.

The first place I ever saw a single-position ante was a button ante at the WSOP in the early levels of some mixed games, because it was necessary to keep the games balanced in the early levels when limits are too low to have a reasonable denomination to have everyone individually ante. But by the third or fourth level, things are back to normal.

I haven't yet decided my full thoughts on BB ante, but please at least have it
a) from the very first level if you decide to use it
b) use it for the first few levels no matter what, even if you decide not to use it later.

You are one of the few players making an argument based on something which isn't mythical. I agree it smoothes out the structure. I disagree that this is a big deal and in fact feel like I prefer the structure to have some "character". It gives an opportunity for players who pay attention to gain an advantage over players who don't. In any case, smoothing out the structure is in no way ample justification for introducing the BB ante concept, especially since there are probably other ways to smooth out the structure, if one is inclined to do so, which don't incur the problems with the BB ante.

Your two cents are pretty spot on IMO. This seems like a solution in search of a problem. More and more I'm thinking many of the people who advocate for it are just looking to change the game and the "time savings" aspect is immaterial... just a convenient excuse. If they were really concerned with how long hands take to play, there are obviously a number of other factors which are much more important than the ante-ing process and which, if addressed, would have a much bigger impact.

I agree with the premise, but I wonder if it really bares out that encouraging early entry leads to larger fields. It would make for an interesting experiment.

Anyhow, on a related topic, in another thread I suggested a system which essentially eliminates antes and just changes the way blinds work. The idea was to gain the benefits of an ante-less system, without incurring the drawbacks of the BB ante system. I'm wondering if an ante-only system could be devised as well, which essentially eliminates the blinds. I mean, the two positions to the left of the button already incur a disadvantage. I don't see why lowering this disadvantage a bit would necessarily be a big deal.

In any case, with ante-only, a structure could be devised which could be made as slow/fast and smooth/bumpy (billybizzle would be pleased) as one wishes. And it would make sense to start with antes immediately, so that would encourage players to start early, like you said. And ante only would to a large degree minimize the table break discrepancy issue. I think the unbalanced table issue would remain, however, without blinds, this might be reduced to some degree. Seems like this sort of idea has a fair bit more merit than the BB ante

Ante-only tournaments have been tried and failed to receive acceptance. Reducing incentive to defend pots results in fewer contested pots which results in a worse game.

Well, I haven't thought it completely through and am not prepared to really endorse the idea. However, fewer contested pots would also mean a significant uptick in hands/hr. Isn't that the main thrust of what many people want? I doubt it would be great for live tv, but I don't see why getting lots more hands/hr would make for a worse game to play on its face.

If a reduction in 'contested pots' is a problem, then it sounds like people are not actually looking to play poker and instead just want to get their gamble on...and if that is the case, then take the veil off of the pig and call changes to the system what they are...

For the most part yes, certainly for the feature events. You may not be able to register for a $100 tourney weeks in advance, but certainly our Ultimate GOLIATH, Milly, Main, and other events with large guarantees.

Is PH using the same tournament chips as last year? If I recall correctly, the 500s were white with specks of light purple, and 100s were white with specks of slightly lighter purple.

More players asked for the pot to be counted than any other tournament I've ever played in because if you weren't keeping track in your head, it was pretty near impossible to get a sense just from looking at the chips in the middle.

Our feature events don't use the set in question, the set you mentioned is mostly for satellites and small daily turbos

BBA is the way of the future. We use it now in our home game tournaments. It took 1 tournament for players to understand the change. The games following everyone understood it, accepted it and now prefer it over the old method. With players being on their phones and paying attention elsewhere most the time the BBA speeds up the hands per hour. If this change even allows for 1 more hand per level its the better way to go.

Enjoy the incoming from the anti BBA 2+2 tag team couple

Won't have any effect on where I play, but this did make me chuckle.


I've played button ante, and that did seem to be quicker than the regular method. However, I have nothing to go on, bar that one tournament, where I was also drinking heavily

I hate going to 4k/8k/1k when 9/10 handed as much as anyone. Its not a great reason to fundamentally change the endstage of tournaments.

The whole premise of an ante is to promote action since every player has put money into the pot on every hand, right? So might as well end the BBA charade and quit calling it an ante and just jack up the blinds.

Replace "since every player has put money into the pot" with "since there is more money in the pot." Go play a splash pot promo hand and see if it decreases action that the extra money wasn't contributed by a player.

Chris - does 3k PLO on 21st have reentries?

Antes are dead money. Blinds are live money. They count towards a player's preflop call. Dead money increases action a lot. Live money increases the action a little. Comparing 4k/8k/1k vs 4k/9k would be an interesting question but the bigger big blind in the latter case just incentivizes the big blind to call the preflop raise more, which doesn't change the amount of money going into the pot going to the flop.

Three blind poker is a very fun format even in tournaments. Pokerstars used to do a 4 blind event on the EPT with 2 small blinds and 2 big (ex. 1/1/2/2 could be a level). Maybe Chris wants to bring that back. Used to do very well.