| |
BGonline.org Forums
NY High Roller Event
Posted By: Stick In Response To: NY High Roller Event (Stick)
Date: Saturday, 16 December 2017, at 8:06 a.m.
Having never run a tournament I obviously have some pretty strong opinions on how it should be ran. Seriously though, as always, we all acknowledge that nobody is getting rich running bg tourneys in the US and that it's a headache most of us wouldn't wish on our worst enemies. The obvious being said, I have a few thoughts on the high roller rake.
First, let's assume the HR gets 16 participants. At least this many seems reasonable as last time we had 20 and satellites are being ran to get players. So at 5% and 16 players that's $2,000 for the house. Again, I realize that the work of running a tournament is what leads up to it, not solely the tournament itself, but the high roller runs itself. Unless the tournament is providing (and paying for?) stations to record and stream matches for example I think any rake is excessive for this event.
Now the last HR Michelle did work her ass off however I was under the impression that she did it herself and was not part of the tournament staff? She gets no cut of said rake as far as I know.
Why do I think any rake is excessive? Because I believe in theory the reason the tournament runs the HR is to have a something special to it. Something that draws the strongest players in the world which in turns draws more of your average, every day player. You want the guys who would play in the HR to show up because they're good for your overall attendance, your bottom line.
Now Mochy points to Super Jackpot he at one point played in his life where a lot of strong players withdrew because of what they saw as a high rake. The strength of the field whittled and he won. The point of that story is ... I'm not sure. It goes without saying (but he said it) that often he loses anyway. It should go without saying that without the other decent players in it the prize pool was (much) smaller so even though he won he won a lot less than if it had been a full field. Which is better for a player like Mochy? Debatable, I don't know offhand and don't want to dedicate the time to think about it.
Now Phil thinks a 5% rake is reasonable, as I'm sure many people do. Seems even more reasonable when you're looking in from the outside. In other words, if you aren't playing in the event aka it doesn't affect you you're like a patron ordering food before a meal. Price means nothing to you. It's only once the bill comes that you're like ... what the hell did I order all this food for!?
I have also always disliked the idea of suggesting what people should do with their winnings. It's one thing to say that you tip which you're more than welcomed to do and the tournament staff will be happy in pigs as shit about it, but to suggest if you don't you're not normal or living up to what you should be doing grinds my gears. Players, no matter the caliber, are already up to their necks in negative equity to attend bg tournaments. Unless you're hustling on the side a tournament in itself with the travel, lodgings, stuffing your face, entry fees, etc... is a black hole that sucks your money. Some players also hedge heavily both before and during a tournament so even though "Player X won the main!" it is highly likely that Stick, the Consolation King, still made more money than the guy who won the main because I would originally have all of my entry.
At a restaurant, esp. my bartenders, I tip well assuming the service isn't rank. However, the wait staff and bartenders make their living off this money. Their wages are nothing and they rely on tips to live. Making a comparison between the tournament staff and the wait staff is, to quote MCG, meh...
Phil: "Anyone who doesn't think the staff is worth 5 percent, or even 10 percent for all they do to make the event happen and run it is, in my opinion, being very unfair and short-sighted"
I'm talking about this specific event and no other. If you want to draw the best players in the world to a special event it helps to offer them something in my opinion. An 'unlimited side pool with 100% return' is nothing. It's almost less than nothing as no fish are going to enter this side pool for any amount of real money and among the strong players I could flip coins or play dollar bill poker and get just as much out of it. It reminds me of the discussion once upon a time here on BGO when people were discussing who the best players are and why. One of the things brought up was 'playing against the best'. To me to this day this is still a wild waste of time. If I wanted to play with myself I'd stay at home.
Super Jackpots range in rake from 0% - 10% from what I've seen. This is the superest of jackpots, what's special about it? Matches to 21 instead of 15? Higher Entry fee? I know the warm, sunny weather and bustling city of NY in January is enough for most. Maybe I'm unreasonable to expect something else from such an event, added money instead of a rake? That old idea of taking care of the best players in the world? Would certain features if implemented assure more played the event thus assuring a bigger attendance for the main tournament? I think so but I'm sure the people that run the tournaments have played out that scenario like the USBGF and their rules...ouch sorry to end on such a cheap shot but sorry not sorry.
Stick
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.