|
BGonline.org Forums
making tournament more attractive to money players
Posted By: Phil Simborg In Response To: making tournament more attractive to money players (Bob Koca)
Date: Friday, 5 October 2018, at 4:19 p.m.
Replies to Koca:
1) If one wants to play money matches why does one need a money match tournament to do that at all?
Because this is different from heads up money play....there is a limit to how much you lose and when and there is strategy depending on how much you are up or down and how much time left. And this provides a "transition" from money to match play and requires some skills in both.
2) This is aimed at money players. If you much prefer money matches you may not like all the shifting values of points that happens in match play. But your system has that shifting as well. For example if down 15 - 0 you have an automatic double. The strategy seems much more like a complicated match than money play. In the last game after time has expired the cube could be dead
Yes, there is some complications because of the score, and that makes it more interesting and fun.
3) You assert that it is but I don't see how this payout structure is much easier to comprehend for poker players and newbies compared to just a regular tournament match to say 9 points.
I have tried this, and it is MUCH EASIER for non-tournament players to understand. It may not be much different for you, but you have no idea how complicated different scores are for non-tournament players; how Crawford and post crawford and gammon go and gammon save and take points and gammon values confuse highly experienced money players who have not played tournaments. I am traveling a lot and playing with money players around the world...many very fine money players who NEVER play in tournaments because match play confuses and scares them. I believe this format will attract them and get them to come to tournament more. If I am wrong, oh well, it's worth a shot.
4) In normal money play what is important is the difference not the ratio of points. Why should a 20 - 12 win gain the same number of $ as a 10 - 6 win or even more bizarrely as a 20 - 19 win from a 1 point tiebreak?
With a 1 hour limitation I don't think we are likely to see the kinds of swings you are talking about, but you make a good point and we'll see if this needs to be changed. I don't think how you apportion the money between the winner and loser of each round is that important...it's going to be a lot more about winning or losing to get to the next round.
5) "Players are clocked so there is no stalling. 12 second delay and a total of 5 minutes in the bank."
There absolutely would still be strategic stalling. For example if one is up say 10 - 0 and have a won position should try to make it be the last game. Having to play one extra game could only hurt you. Could lead to something like using the full 12 seconds on a forced play.
Of course there will be some stalling. If you are winning you will play slower, and if you are losing you will play faster, but with 5 minutes in the bank for a 1 hour match, the stalling can never be more than 5 minutes. Maybe we will find we need to shorten it to 3 or 4 minutes.
|
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.