Quote:
Originally Posted by spadebidder
Representing it as the percent of the prize pool amount makes no sense whatsoever and I disagree with Steve that you can even make an argument for that. There's no logical reason to use that as a denominator.
For the record, Steve didn't say you could make an argument for
either denominator. I said it's a matter of personal preference -- from the standpoint of logic, the choice is arbitrary.
Quote:
...The buy-in is $100, of which some portion will be allocated for the prize and some portion for the house. In this case 20% to the house and 80% to the prize. Saying the buy-in is $80 and by the way plus a 25% fee, is ludicrous.
(I haven't encountered the "by the way" phrase in this context, so I have to consider it rhetorical embellishment.) So the ubiquitous form venues used -- IIRC just about all of them until Harrah's started doing it differently for the WSOP a few years ago -- and many of them still use, buy-in + fee, e.g., $80+20, is ... ludicrous?
In the olden days of the previous millennium, terminology was pretty consistent: "buy-in" meant the amount of the prize pool contribution, and "entry fee" meant the, er, fee (vig/juice). E.g., $80+$20 verbalized would have been "eighty dollar buy-in, twenty dollar entry fee." These days some people say "buy-in" for the combined amount, but even more say "entry fee" for the combined amount, implicitly thinking, I suppose, that it's the amount required to enter. Of course I'm nostalgic for the olden days.
Quote:
Thread should have ended on post #2. It's that simple.
Ah. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Last edited by Steve Brecher; 08-28-2011 at 09:49 PM.
Reason: Added one (1) comma and one (1) dollar sign.