If nobody fought a losing battle, there would be no battles, and bullies would just run roughshod over everything.

Anyhow, what I find particularly interesting about the debate over this whole thing is the proponents tend to be "really" for it, and yet they can't make any really strong arguments for why its a good thing. I mean, sure there are some benefits. But they aren't that impressive. I am willing to admit that these peripheral benefits, like a somewhat smoother structure, or saving something like 5% of the time it takes to deal a hand may be REALLY important to some. and therefore, the BB ante is a great thing to them. But there are just as many drawbacks which have been discussed that might be REALLY important to some. And this is why the BB ante is not a good thing to them.

It seems to me that any change in format ought to have, at its core, some sort of easily understandable and significant benefit to the majority of players. I can see how the BB ante might benefit some types of players. But I don't see how it will benefit the majority of players, especially since it does exacerbate inequities in a number of situations.

And so, if it does become mainstream, it will not be because it is an actually positive change which benefits the game, but rather because some vocal minority pushes for it and the silent and likely disinterested (or ignorant) majority doesn't push back.

A disinterested (or ignorant) majority may go along with whatever for a while. But it also has a tendency to disappear. And I don't see how that would be good for anyone.

There are clueless people who do all sorts of stupid and self-defeating things. Is this the latest argument for the BB ante... that we should have it because people who don't care won't care?

Every year people bellyache about how bad the rake is on $365 events...and those same people enter the events anyways. Not saying then we should do whatever we want because people won't care, but at the end of the day, poker players have to vote with their wallets, and they usually vote to not care.

I totally agree with that sentiment. However rake is an easily understandable thing. And when it goes up it is an understandable, if unfortunate, fact of business. I have yet to hear anyone make a business case for the BB ante.

What is the "business case" for the traditional ante? Arias Twitter poll, while not being a perfect poll of all players, indicated overwhelming support from their players for BBA. That is their "business case".

Allowing "smoother" structures allows people to feel happier with the flow of the tournament without increasing the actual time that the tournament takes. Happier players come back.

Simplifying the ante process mitigates the impact that mediocre or worse dealers have on the pace of play and reduces opportunity for mistake, not just specifically for the ante process but because that allows far fewer physical chips to be on the table, expediting and simplifying stack countdowns, etc.

The previous poster was comparing the BB ante (and potential blowback to it) to rake. I was simply indicating that there is a business case for rake. And I have yet to hear a business case for the BB ante. I was not insinuating there is a business case for the traditional ante (compared to the BB ante). And really, there doesn't need to be. We are not at the beginning of a new venture and trying to decide between two alternatives. We are decades into a venture, and trying to decide if we want to make a fundamental change. Those are very different scenarios. And I am not even opposed to change, if it is actually change for the better. With the BB ante, its very murky.

And Aria's Twitter poll is not just imperfect. Its pretty much useless as a scientific device to establish people's views and reaction to things. If Aria chooses to base its business decisions on such things, then they are free to do so.

Anyhow, all of the benefits you ascribed to the BB ante system, to the degree that these are real and valuable benefits, can be obtained through other ante-less structures which have been discussed in other threads. And these other structures do not have the same warts that the BB ante does. And, if one does not want to make such wholesale changes in fear that they will change game dynamics, one could still just modify the existing ante structure to make it smoother, since this is fairly arbitrary.

Polls on twitter are utterly useless...unless it is called to the attention of people, the non-followers won't know about it. There are LOTS of poker players who are not even ON twitter, and of those that are there, many don't follow each and every poker room or player. The first I (and likely others) even heard ABOUT the poll was when it got brought up earlier in this thread (I think it was this thread, might have been one of the others in this sub-forum), by which time it had closed.

Further, it had fewer than 1400 votes recorded, which is hardly resounding. While a properly structured poll can obtain some manner of statistical validity with that few through sampling methods, a Twitter poll fails to meet those standards.

Compounding matters is that players are being told to take it or leave it. Thus there was clearly no intentions on the part of Aria and others to even consider the issues that have been raised against the move.

The fact that some players will enter anything that is put out there is not the same as those players overwhelmingly supporting or agreeing with the unnecessary change.

Personally, I don't like it. I will have to try it out as it is a relatively new thing for me.

I can see it working for lower buyin tournaments with smaller blind lengths. The time saved and the smoother structure works out.

for deeper structures with higher buyins with longer blind lengths all the problems brought forth in this thread and the other thread will be magnified.

Chris,

Where can I find structure sheets?

Thanks

You sound like chainsaw bud. Literally everyone that has played the format thinks it's an improvement. You're just nit picking at small irrelevant crap. If I had a dime for every forkin time someone started a "but I put my ante in dealer" argument that ended up taking a few minutes ... FOR THAT alone it is amazing.

Hi everyone, looks like the BB ante discussion has been completed. Thanks to everyone for their feedback. We are completing the WSOPC and had multiple events with BB ante. Feedback was extremely positive and favorable. I look forward to a deeper dive into BB ante over the summer.

Structure sheets are being worked on and hope to release next week.

Thanks everyone!

[QUOTE=zoogenhiem;53638755]There are players who enter mixed game tournaments thinking it's going to be NLHE...so you really think they'll notice it's BBA and not enter?[/QUOT


lmao ... Gotta love the donkers

You are imagining both the frequency and the net effect (time wise) that these sorts of delays occur. Its understandable when people are impatient or easily agitated that any little thing gets blown way out of proportion.

Anyhow, I believe the people who think its an improvement (at least those who think its a significant improvement) fall into one of two groups. Group A have some sort of psychological affinity for miniscule time savings, no matter the cost, and Group B like the way this format changes the manner in which the game is played from a competitive standpoint. Members of both groups are either completely unaware of, or don't care about the drawbacks of the system. For those in Group B, I suppose this is ok, so long as they are honest about why they like the new format instead of falling back on mythical time savings. As for Group A, they really need to reconsider their position because there may be alternatives that satisfy their psychological needs without incurring the problems of the BB ante.

As for chainsaw, he's quite a character. He knows a lot about poker. He just doesn't seem to know very much about business (at least he makes one think that with some of the things he says), and is also often incapable of making reasoned arguments. He often falls into the "I think its right, so it must be so" frame of mind. That, of course, does not mean he is wrong about any particular topic. And whenever I agree with him, I have no problem supporting his viewpoints (usually with a fair bit more thought and logic than he does .

Anyhow, I have come at the BB ante issue without any biases whatsoever. I was told by vocal proponents that eliminating ante collection saves tons of time. I was a little dubious of this claim, but would have been happy to have it born out in reality. I did my own investigation into it and have deduced the BB ante cannot possible save tons of time since the ante collection process does not take tons of time. People who believe it does are either playing poker with completely incompetent dealers, or they are just imaging the time savings.

What the BB ante can do is exacerbate inequities when tables are imbalanced or during table break procedures. And what it can do is change the way that hands are played from a strategy/dynamics standpoint. Who knows, maybe this last point leads to hands being played faster since there are fewer players and less-contested pots. If that's the case, I would say, ok, lets have an honest debate about whether changes should be made to the fundamental nature of live holdem poker in order to increase hands/hr, instead of this farce about how long it takes to collect antes.

No offence, how many live tournaments do you play yearly? You self-admitted on another thread that you're basically a keyboard warrior on 2p2. I'm not "imagining" anything, I'm speaking from experience.

He what now?

What "investigations" have you done bud? When's the last time you played a live tournament? Jesus. I played 20 just past two weeks. Numerous times dealers wasted time (including many where floor was called!) figuring out who didn't pay, or making sure people that were on their phones paid. And that's just the tables I was on.

Speaking as someone who hasn't posted a response to any of the 5 threads that have now been hijacked by this BB ante discussion or cares in any way at all, let me ask in all sincerity--Are you high?

I am posting the over under for it being godwinned at May 15th and then moderators having to step in and squanching all posts about it at May 20th.

To answer your first question, no.

I was politely trying to steer the thread to a different direction.

Looking forward to this series, it will be my first time playing any events in it and I will be staying at your property. As far as the BBA (I am not for or against this BTW as I have never played in a tournament that had this.) Would that mean the BB would post the 200 for the table and no one else would ante?

I feel for TD Chris, whose thread has been hijacked. This should be about the Phamous Series. While BBA is featured in some of the events, making it somewhat topical, we have a thread to discuss the pros and cons of BBA. Such discussion should be there.

By completed, he clearly meant "ignored" just as the comments of those who do not care for it and have voiced the personal experience are ignored.

Some poker players are more equal than other poker players.

yes. so if the level is 150 - 300 and the event is using BB ante then the big blind posts an additional 300 and no one else posts an ante.

Ha, thanks. I'm fine with the discussion taking place here. Many opinions have been offered and it was nice for me to get some first hand experience from the perspective of an operator this past week w the WSOPC event. The players were very in favor of BB ante. Many perspectives have been offered as to if it speeds up the game or not, simplicity, and how it impacts the game. I made it a point to speak with many players - recs, pros, and grinders. I also watched all of the events offering BB ante very closely. My general take away is that players just enjoy the change. BB ante is certainly an action generator - especially in 6 max and turbo events. That seems to be what the players like about BB ante, action. Are more hands actually dealt, I think yes. But I think the players like the simplicity of one ante versus an entire table.

BB ante will work very well at Ph for GOLIATH I think (for designated events). Our starting stacks are extremely deep in most events using BB ante - 20K or greater. It certainly allows for some creative play without having the pressure of making one mistake and being short-stacked early.

This statement is 100% false. The feedback on this thread, certainly the Twitter convo that many players disagreed strongly with you on recently, and field test show support for BB ante. There is also concern, that hasn't been ignored which is why GOLIATH (and WSOP) is testing BB ante. Many other venues are all in on BB ante, I am not. Something for everyone is offered at Ph.

Your voice certainly hasn't been ignored and your perspective has also been strongly considered. But a simple trip through this thread, other convos about BB ante on 2+2, and various twitter convos (including the one you were highly vocal on @ph_poker when many in the industry disagreed strongly with you) show many more are in support of BB ante than those against.

We can agree to disagree if you'd like. I certainly welcome you to participate in GOLIATH over the summer. If your dead against BB ante that's fine, I have roughly 60 events that don't use BB ante.

Thanks Chris, I appreciate it

Is this the part where you tell us all the pro-BBA ante people are idiot liberal snowflakes like you did on twitter?