What's new
By:
Filters

Winter Poker League Discussion

Gameface

Gameface

1135809
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
I’d like to start working on how the winter poker league will work.

Questions:

Do we want to have a league buy-in?

I am fine with a league buy-in, but I feel that it limited participation in the Summer League. Maybe that’s a good thing?

If so, how much should it be?

I’m inclined to keep a league buy-in, but I think it should be reduced to $40. While I want to be as inclusive as possible, I also want people who are dedicated to participate. The league buy-in creates an instant prize pool for the league winners and helps to make sure players continue to play through the entire season.

Should we withhold part of the tournament buy-in for the league prize pool?

I also think some of each tournament buy-in should be withheld for the tournament winners. Along with that I think the cost of entry per tournament should go up a little. I’ve been setting the tournament buy-in at $20 for over ten years. I think it’s time to bump it up a little. I don’t want to discourage players from playing, but I want there to be something for the winners to win that matters to them.

How much should each tournament cost?

I’m considering a tournament entry cost of $40, with $10 going towards the league prize pool. But I’d also like to have a rebuy tournament and a larger buy-in tournament, similar to how I did it in the “Gameface Poker League” in 2012.

Do we want to limit participation to 10 players or allow up to 20?

I’d be fine limiting the league to 10 players. If there was strong interest by enough people to get to 20 players I’d be happy with that, too. The most important aspect, for me, is that the people in the league want to be there and are dedicated to playing in the games.

What number of tournaments should we play and over what span of time?

I think 6 tournaments is not enough to make league standings meaningful. It is also tough only being able to drop one game. I think there should be 9 games, but I do not want to have a league that lasts 9 months. I’m considering a Nov-May schedule that will play one game a month except for two months in which we will play two games. I think Jan or Feb will be one of the double tournament months and April will be the other. With 9 tournaments we will increase the drop games to 3, so your score would be determined by your top 6 tournaments.

Should league prizes be determined by points alone, or should there be a final tournament played by the highest ranking players that determines the payouts?

I liked having a Tournament of Champions in the Gameface Poker League. I do, however, see how a person who has the most points could feel like it is unfair to determine payouts based on a single tournament after they have performed well over an entire season. I’d suggest that such a player would already be ahead based their individual tournament wins and the league prize would be a bonus. I could go either way on this.

How should we calculate points?

I want to use a better formula for the next poker league. I know Dr. Neau’s formula is a bit complicated, but it is a good formula that is better at taking into account the size of the field, the buy-in and that it’s harder to win than to come in second and it’s harder to win against 20 than it is to win against 8.

This is the formula: score = SQRT (n * b * b / e) / (f + 1.0)

where

n = number of participants in the tournament
b = standard buy-in cost for the tournament
e = the individual player’s total expense (buy-ins + add-ons + rebuys)
f = the individual player’s finish


So, those are some things to consider. I want to have this worked out before the end of September. I am not 100% committed to hosting a winter poker league. I want for me and anyone who might play to know what they’re getting into. On that note, I plan to have a set league schedule before the first game. I have not liked the way we have done it this season.


Oh, and if we were to have a 20 player league I would guarantee that the league winner will get at least $1000. I think that would be enticing.
 
A winter league would be easier for me to commit to.
I would personally prefer to not have to come up with a buy in up front, on top of the regular buy in. But it's not a deal breaker.
I'd try for 20 players. If you did 20, would you do a 10 person final night with a play in game again?
Overall, I liked how you ran the last league. I do agree that having a last tournament could leave someone feeling screwed. If they go into that last, winner take all night in 1st place, but have a bad night and end up missing the pay out, it could be rough. But I think I benefited from that last time, so screw them.
 
I have no input. Just let me know the details once decided. :p
 
bigb said:
A winter league would be easier for me to commit to.
I would personally prefer to not have to come up with a buy in up front, on top of the regular buy in. But it's not a deal breaker.
I'd try for 20 players. If you did 20, would you do a 10 person final night with a play in game again?
Overall, I liked how you ran the last league. I do agree that having a last tournament could leave someone feeling screwed. If they go into that last, winner take all night in 1st place, but have a bad night and end up missing the pay out, it could be rough. But I think I benefited from that last time, so screw them.
Click to expand...


If there was a tournament of champions game it wouldn't be winner take all. Like last time, anyone who qualified for the ToC would get some payout.

If there was a 20 player league with a $40 buy in that'd be $800 in league prize money off the bat, and if there was a $10 amount withheld and we average 16 players per tournament, that'd be $1440 more for the league winners, or $2240. The first place winner would get $1000.
 
So how about if there is a league buy-in of $40 but you have the option to just pay $10 per tournament over the first four. Or if you cash you have to cover it with that.
 
Gameface said:
So how about if there is a league buy-in of $40 but you have the option to just pay $10 per tournament over the first four. Or if you cash you have to cover it with that.
Click to expand...
It's just a preference. I'd pay the buy in upfront of that's what you wanted.
 
bigb said:
It's just a preference. I'd pay the buy in upfront of that's what you wanted.
Click to expand...

Honestly I'm kind of torn on the league buy-in thing.

It's good as a tool for filtering out people who don't really want to play in the league.

It is a motivator for people in the league to continue to participate.

It creates an instant prize pool for the league winners.

But, as a filter it catches some people who would participate in the league but just don't want to put money up front like that.

It makes it unlikely that people will join the league after it starts.



One of the things I liked about the 2012 league was that it was very open. Buy-in was $25, $5 went to the league prize pool, if you played in a game you were considered to be in the league. There were 27 different players in the league. Some played one game, some played a couple games, some played most games and some played all the games. I thought it worked.

The play-in game and the possibility that if you made the ToC you could take first and get a nice payout kept people involved even when it started looking like they weren't going to automatically qualify for the ToC. And being safe for making the ToC didn't stop the top players from playing, either.
 
So here's an idea.

League members pay the $40 tournament buy-in ($30+$10). Non-League members pay a $10 non-member fee on top of their buy-in ($30+$10+$10). If you've payed the non-member fee 5 times you're in the league and don't have to pay it anymore.

So paying up-front will save you $10 off the league buy-in.
 
I about lost it.

I saw the thread title and author and thought it said "winter Pokemon league."

Was soooo disappointed for about 10 seconds.
(Probably similar to how ncoloradojazz' wife routinely feels.)
 
One thing I promise if we do the winter league is that the standings will be nearly instantaneous. I think that's a huge part of league participation and I don't think the players should have to wait to find out where they are at. The coordination between Gustavo and myself hasn't been as good as it could be. That is something I want to improve on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I always strive to provide the best experience possible for the players. For me it's not about me playing poker, it's about me hosting and organizing a top-notch game. Sometimes my own game suffers as a result, but honestly I can sacrifice my own game. I have a vision for what this should be and I set out to achieve that vision. I guess in a business meeting we'd call that Home Poker from 30,000 feet. I want to be able to look down at my game and see something that works as a whole for the people involved. I value the participants and I constantly try to put myself in the shoes of the person who is attending my game for the first time. I want to make sure they feel welcome and that they are not confused about what to do, when to do it, etc. I want it to be as seamless and relaxing as possible. I hope that I come close to that goal, but I know that I can always do more and make the experience better.

That is why I'm asking for input. But that is also why I will own the way this league is organized by myself.

I hope that we come up with something that works for enough people to make a winter league happen. But this time I want to err on the side of doing something for people who are passionate about poker. Something that may be less inclusive, but will be a better experience for those who are enthusiastic for the game.

I put a lot of my own time, effort and money into facilitating this. I don't expect every person who participates to be willing to go the extent that I go to, but I do want people who appreciate the difference between what I do and what is more common in home poker games. I hope that is something that appeals to enough people to make this work, but if it doesn't then I will step back and try to figure out a new way to make the kind of game I would prefer to play in while appealing to enough people to make it happen.
 
So I'm pretty good at killing the conversation, but all the same, I want to do the winter poker league and I want it to be awesome.

If what I've proposed above would make it more likely you'd play I'd love to know that. If it makes it less likely you'd play I want to know that too, just not as much.
 
I'd even go for a session of HORSE (Hold'em, Omaha Hi/Lo, Razz, Stud, Stud Eight or better).
 
Things I will not play are non-poker games, like 7/21, pass the trash, indian poker, follow the bitch, etc.

I'd play draw poker as part of a dealer's choice type game, but only grudgingly.

I won't play with wild cards
 
Gameface said:
Things I will not play are non-poker games, like 7/21, pass the trash, indian poker, follow the bitch, etc.

I'd play draw poker as part of a dealer's choice type game, but only grudgingly.

I won't play with wild cards
Click to expand...

Isn't any game where you are trying to get the highest poker hand technically a poker variant? Hold' em is a poker variant itself. Personally I've always found hours of hold'em to be boring.
 
♪alt13 said:
Isn't any game where you are trying to get the highest poker hand technically a poker variant? Personally I've always found hours of hold'em to be boring.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, follow the bitch is a poker game, but not one I want to play. 7/21 is not a poker game. Indian poker or Blind man's bluff is not a poker game.

I've mentioned several other poker games I'd play in a heartbeat. Omaha Hi, Omaha Hi/lo, Razz, Stud, Stud Hi/lo and even five card draw. I'd go for pineapple or iron cross, too. Just don't want to play with wild cards and don't want to play stuff that is essentially poker card lotto.
 
I'd also be down for a spades tournament.
 
Gameface said:
Well, yeah, follow the bitch is a poker game, but not one I want to play. 7/21 is not a poker game. Indian poker or Blind man's bluff is not a poker game.

I've mentioned several other poker games I'd play in a heartbeat. Omaha Hi, Omaha Hi/lo, Razz, Stud, Stud Hi/lo and even five card draw. I'd go for pineapple or iron cross, too. Just don't want to play with wild cards and don't want to play stuff that is essentially poker card lotto.
Click to expand...

I don't see a problem with wild cards. Most of the cards are dealt up. You have to try and read people more and the cards less but I wouldn't call it card lotto.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top