Cash Tour 2012

[Des]

- Players can rebuy into the game once during Phase 1.

Is the Apat 5% fee applied to rebuys

DD:  No, don"t envisage that.

- Tables will be kept balanced.

A move could prove to be either very beneficial or critical for a player, for example, a player is chipleader at table A and is moved to table B (potentially with few hands remaining before cut for phase 2) where his stack is dwarfed by two or more players at this super soft table. See next point for more on this.



-At the end of the three hours, the two players with the most cash on each table will qualify through to Phase 2.

Why not just top 10 chip counts over the 5 tables? Would it be really unfair to be eliminated ahead of a shorter stack who happened to place 1st or 2nd at a table where both players had marginally improved their stacks?


DD:  Agreed.  A further option would be to play the Phase 1 tables in shootout style.  Again, what do you guys think?  The beauty of a trial is we can discuss upfront and test any format.

[Des]

- Tables will be kept balanced.

A move could prove to be either very beneficial or critical for a player, for example, a player is chipleader at table A and is moved to table B (potentially with few hands remaining before cut for phase 2) where his stack is dwarfed by two or more players at this super soft table. See next point for more on this.



-At the end of the three hours, the two players with the most cash on each table will qualify through to Phase 2.

Why not just top 10 chip counts over the 5 tables? Would it be really unfair to be eliminated ahead of a shorter stack who happened to place 1st or 2nd at a table where both players had marginally improved their stacks?

I think Brendan has a point. If arbitrary or "next BB" movements apply, the concept of the top two qualifying could be blown up by a big stack moving. What if a few players got tired of being run over and left at the same time from one table and the other two biggest stacks got moved to that table? Maybe table-balancing could be achieved by moving the smallest stack.

We"ll take feedback before making a final call on this.  Ultimately we wouldn"t want to go with a concept that didn"t work.

[Des]

Hi all,

- Players can exit the game at any point, but in doing so they forfeit their Grinder payment.

If a player leaves the game, can a new player join? ie an alternate

Agree with the top 10 going through irrespective of which table they are on.

Would be an interesting last few hands as there could be some multi all ins to tray and get to phase 2 and similar at the end of phase 2

Yes, a new player could join at any point during Phase 1.

Top 10 - to be discussed.

Agreed, a player who has made a decent profit in the first phase may choose to stand and take his winnings rather than get involved in the final half hour of what could be mayhem.  The dynamics will be interesting for sure.

[wawre]

Will there be a buffet?

[Joker161]

I"m surprised at the £9 max for the rake. In Vegas you can sit down at a $1/$2 table with $300 and the rake will be the same 5%, but with a maximum of $5. Basically nearly every significant pot had a $5 rake.

I think a £5 max would be fairer, so any pot over £100 would have the same rake. I shouldn"t think there would be that many pots over £100 (perhaps towards the end - see above), so perhaps it wouldn"t make much difference. I can"t do the Maths off the top of my head, but how much of the total money on all tables will end up in the Dealers" trays? It was always disconcerting in Vegas, during a long cash session, how often the Dealer needed change for his/her tray. The stacks of $1 chips that appeared was essentially the rake for the last hour or so.

I agree with the points made above about table balancing (moving the smallest stake makes sense) and taking the top 10 stacks. Imagine being the 3rd highest stack, but the only two bigger stacks are on your table - gutted!

Sounds great. I"m almost looking forward to going out on Day 1!

[ronaldo07]

Not going to Brighton but if I was I"d defo give it a go.

I reckon the rake taken at 9% in a 6 hour sesh would be around the £600 Mark if the pots are ave about £20 and 20-25 hands/hour

GL with this

[Honeybadg]

Great idea - allow (a few) more re-buys??

Only starting 100BB"s deep.

I would drop the Grinder"s payment - you may create some odd incentives for the final table - if someone has built a mega stack by say 8.30pm they could dwell/fold their way to the £500.

Why not have 50 runners from start to finish - top profit wins a trophy?

Why kick out 40 runners after three hours?

L

[Paulie_D]

It"s always nice to see some innovation and I have no problem with a trial.

It"s not something I can see myself playing and for that reason I find it a shame that, if successful, this will replace the Side Events.

Yes, I know that, apart from DTD, they"ve nearly all been PLO but at least something other than NLHE is being offered. How are we to promote the spreading of other poker variants if we dump the side events in favour of what is, in effect, already being offered by the casino...to wit...a HE cash game?

The Side Events were a reason for me, and many others, to hang around on Sunday after, as usual, bombing out of the Main Event thus making the trip a little more value for money. It would be a BIG shame to see them go.

Notwithstanding that I won"t be partaking, I do find the idea of rake being taken in what is essentially a tournament somewhat disturbing. This looks like a definite money maker (ahem) for the Casino but -EV for the players.

I"m also disturbed by APAT charging a fee.

I"m assuming since APAT are taking the fee that this is not a mis-named casino fee (they"re already getting a GENEROUS rake FFS). If this is an APAT event it should be reg free....it"s the APAT ethos.

If it is a casino fee I think it would be more appropriate to increase this to a more standard % and cut the rake.

Like I said, I won"t be playing in this...I"ll be trying to get Side Event SNG"s off the ground...or at the bar.

[TheWagoon]

Real shame, always enjoyed the usual side events and was looking forward to the same at brighton

Will play this anyway I guess even though it doesn"t sound very good compared to the normal sides.

[AAroddersAA]

I keep typing responses to this and reading them and thinking I sound so negative and like I am complaining. Well I have been pretty negative recently so maybe it"s the new me *lol*

I just don"t see the point in this. If you want a cash game, have a cash game. If you want a side bet on it so we have a winner then that"s cool as well. This whole concept just feels wrong though.

Firstly what if I lose half my stack, I will want to top up, does this count as my 1 rebuy? I actually tend to top up quite soon after going below starting stack, it"s +EV.

Secondly let"s say I think my edge over the field is 10BB/100 (I believe it to be less than that), but if it is then as we are only playing 100 hands (approx - most likely less) if we play our "normal" cash game we expect to lose to the grinder bet and reg fee. There is the chance to win the grinder bet of course but in reality people who gamble to try and get into the top 10 are going to push the people playing good solid poker out. There is an argument that this will create some +EV situations that would not otherwise exist.

The grinder bet is too large and brings in all sort of strange dynamics to the final table which do not really encourage good cash game play. For example I have to call a bet against the odds with a flush draw as there is another £500 on top of it and I cannot bet the flush draw off. Basic cash "rules" stop applying.

imo - have randomly drawn tables and just play a cash game for the full 7 hours or whatever it is with full cash game rules. Keep the blinds at 25p/50p and make the min buyin £50 and the max £100. Have a £5 grinder bet for the player who makes the most profit, maybe have a first and second prize, basically make this grinder bet worth a whole lot less, it should be a bonus not the most important thing. This might be a bit idealistic as I do not know how hard this would be to ploice with rebuys and top-ups and everything else.

Like I said don"t mean to come across as super negative and the game run as a trial sounds like fun, but as a tour I just don"t see it working too well.

[Delboy]

Its a very interesting idea Des. Here are my thoughts:

The rake/ fee and Jackpot (Grinder payment) combo make it a very expensive game to play and long term - ev for the players. I would suggest a jackpot drop from each pot over say £20 to add to the Grinder pool for the prize. The rake seems fine but I dunno about the fee aswell.

The idea of balancing tables is fine, surely they would self balance anyway as the big stacks will want to go where the money is? The Jackpot is, after all a bonus, the main idea is to make money.

The time limit is about right.

I"m not too worried about the 100bb start. Its deep enough and replicates online.

Are we allowed to do deals for the jackpot?

[pewpwagoon]

It"s always nice to see some innovation and I have no problem with a trial.

It"s not something I can see myself playing and for that reason I find it a shame that, if successful, this will replace the Side Events.

Yes, I know that, apart from DTD, they"ve nearly all been PLO but at least something other than NLHE is being offered. How are we to promote the spreading of other poker variants if we dump the side events in favour of what is, in effect, already being offered by the casino...to wit...a HE cash game?

The Side Events were a reason for me, and many others, to hang around on Sunday after, as usual, bombing out of the Main Event thus making the trip a little more value for money. It would be a BIG shame to see them go.

Notwithstanding that I won"t be partaking, I do find the idea of rake being taken in what is essentially a tournament somewhat disturbing. This looks like a definite money maker (ahem) for the Casino but -EV for the players.

I"m also disturbed by APAT charging a fee.

I"m assuming since APAT are taking the fee that this is not a mis-named casino fee (they"re already getting a GENEROUS rake FFS). If this is an APAT event it should be reg free....it"s the APAT ethos.

If it is a casino fee I think it would be more appropriate to increase this to a more standard % and cut the rake.

Like I said, I won"t be playing in this...I"ll be trying to get Side Event SNG"s off the ground...or at the bar.

I agree totally with Paulie.

The extra side event is what makes APAT events what they are; you bust the main you can have a laugh and play the side. Most will agree with me that they are traveling to APAT events to play TOURNAMENTS and NOT CASH games.

If I wanted to play some cash I would stay at home.

Its a shame there is not going to be a side event at Brighton; I hope this will not be the case for any future events.

Lukas

[AAroddersAA]

Its a very interesting idea Des. Here are my thoughts:

The rake/ fee and Jackpot (Grinder payment) combo make it a very expensive game to play and long term - ev for the players. I would suggest a jackpot drop from each pot over say £20 to add to the Grinder pool for the prize. The rake seems fine but I dunno about the fee aswell.

The idea of balancing tables is fine, surely they would self balance anyway as the big stacks will want to go where the money is? The Jackpot is, after all a bonus, the main idea is to make money.

The time limit is about right.

I"m not too worried about the 100bb start. Its deep enough and replicates online.

Are we allowed to do deals for the jackpot?

This is a very good idea, makes the game less auto -EV
Deals on the jackpot could certainly work (and should be allowed as we are paying a reg fee and there is no added value). I still like prizes for more than one player and a straight game rather than moving the top 10 stacks to one table and moving the blinds up.

[pables]

I have spoken to the Rendezvous card room and they inform me that they are still running their own tourney on the Sunday which is

£45 Super Turbo Freezeout
£6 reg
20,000 chips1
15 minute blinds
£1500 guaranteed with 15 players from the start

If you wanna steer clear of cash like me  

oh and are you coming now Rodders  

[AMRN]

the more I think about this, and having read all the feedback so far..... this doesn"t feel like a cash game at all - it would appear to be just a tournament by another name, with most of the usual tournament dynamics, but far more heavily taxed than any tournament I ever play in.  The grinder pot would make such a huge influence that it turns the "final table" into a winner takes all STT.