Cash Tour - Finalised Format for Leg 3 - UKCOAP, Nottingham

[MintTrav]

It"s the pedant in me that says that if I make 100% profit and you only make 50%....then I"m better than you at making a profit regardless of the actual cash amount.

Actually, I agree. I whipped Isildur"s ass last week. We were playing at the same time, though not actually on the same table. I turned my $100 into $150 for a 50% profit, while he failed to make any more than a 25% profit on his $1m.

[SirPercival]

Is anyone else still confused?

John asked a question and the answer was "yes we"ll do it that way" from Mark.

So £50 starting stack ends phase 1 with £200
£200 starting stack ends phase 1 with £375

Who goes to final?

What if £200 stack was £345?

[KarmaDope]

Is anyone else still confused?

John asked a question and the answer was "yes we"ll do it that way" from Mark.

So £50 starting stack ends phase 1 with £200
£200 starting stack ends phase 1 with £375

Who goes to final? Player 2 from how I read it

What if £200 stack was £345? Player 1 then, he has made £5 more

Assuming my answers are correct above - the player buying in for £200 has an advantage but it stops a ridiculous situation where someone who buys in for £50, only has one bullet and makes money doesnt make the FT whereas a player buying in for £200 and losing £10 does!

[MarkTheShark]

It was not a case of John asks a question and i changed my mind - as said, i was caught off guard by Paulie"s question which was valid and simply didnt think it through properly - keying on the percentage increase element, which is not what this is about.

To qualify for the FT, it will be the 8 most profitable stacks and will be a simple calculation.

Total stack less amount of buyin(s) - which will either be 50, 100, 150 or 200. This will be known at the absolute latest with 5 hands to play.

The 8 largest profit elements will proceed to the FT with their WHOLE STACK and continue to play on - everyone else will cash out. If there is a tie on the 8th place position where two players have made the same amount of profit (which could have happened as said with it being Stack Sizes) then i see no reason why one should be given preference over the other - they have both done equally as well so both should proceed - unless one wishes not to.

At the FT the winning objective is BIGGEST OVERALL STACK. We like the change in principle, giving players - all of whom are in profit and (i dare say) will have sizeable stacks - a different mindset then of the approach to the FT, with higher blinds. As has been said, there is nothing to say we have to be consistent from one Phase to another and I certainly agree with that.

Simply put - you sit - or by last 5 hands have bought in for - £200 and end up with £280 = £80 profit

You sit with just £50 and hand back 3 tokens with last 5 hands to play and end up with £140 = £90 profit. This player gains the higher placing. By virtue of the fact that he has gained more money in the session than the previous player.

We feel this gives lower staked players or those without means to buy in for the max an equal (or certainly fairer) shot at making the FT than those with simply more cash to utilise.

I hope this is quite clear now.

[Fatcatstu]

That sounds like the most sensible approach to it to me, Mark good call

[TheSnapper]

I certainly hope we can find a "Moneymaker" moment where some fortunate player buy"s in for the min and 5 hours later is sat at the final table with £1k + and a title.

I"m not a fan of the "profit rule" for phase 1 but I see it may entice more players to the game, it"s now affordable to the smaller bankroll which is welcome given the trend now for re-entry events that favour the better rolled players.

I do suspect the above scenario is unlikely though, players who opt for min buy in will most likely be under-rolled for the game and this will hinder their ability to play optimally, also, ultimately they will have to play a for a sustained period in a deep-stacked game that is somewhat alien to them.

I suspect a large majority of those will not take their final table seat, either because they, wish to lock up a win, their risk averse nature won"t allow, or both!

Ultimately though, if the under-rolled player is your target audience, is this is more like a rake free cash game than a cash tournament?

[SirPercival]

 Mark,

I wasn"t suggesting you had changed your mind I was just seeking clarification on what the rule was. John"s post finished with a question mark and I couldn"t see a clear answer to the question.

Your post is quite clear now. It"s on £s profit.

Cheers

[MarkTheShark]

Thanks guys, and apologies for the confusion i caused initially.

[CW86]

Phase One:- (9am - Midnight)

That"s a seriously long session!

Fixed...

Shame!

[Chipaccrual]

Phase One:- (9am - Midnight)

That"s a seriously long session!

Fixed...

Shame!

They"d still call the clock on you after 20 seconds, even if it was a 15 hour session  

[s4ooter]

Controversial

[AAroddersAA]

Is it just me who thinks that the most profit rule rather than largest stack rule is not the best way to go here.

I mean everybody can top up to the max anyway, so the only way anybody is going to land on the final table without being one of the biggest stacks is if they do not use their top ups. I don"t really see how this is good for the game as I would rather have a £190 stack at the table who has lost £10 after sitting with £200 than a £150 who has won £100 and not chosen to top up. Being rolled for the game you are playing is an integral part of cash games, and anybody who is under-rolled should be at a disadvantage in my opinion and we should not mitigate this. Being able to exploit those who are not is also important in live cash games (I am bad at this btw).

Anyway whatever this rule I am sad not to be playing this and hope to be back to these games soon will certainly try to make the next round of this game at Stoke in Jan, BUT.........

For WCOAP, please, please, please, please, please - if it can be done. APAT - The Cash Game (I know I ask every year *lol*). A no nonsense good old fashioned CASH GAME, a real one, this concept is fun but it is not a true honest to god cash game). Have an entry fee or rake the table but make it a cash game everything goes. I can think of some amazing tables we could get.

[SirPercival]

Is it just me who thinks that the most profit rule rather than largest stack rule is not the best way to go here.
I mean everybody can top up to the max anyway, so the only way anybody is going to land on the final table without being one of the biggest stacks is if they do not use their top ups. I don"t really see how this is good for the game as I would rather have a £190 stack at the table who has lost £10 after sitting with £200 than a £150 who has won £100 and not chosen to top up. Being rolled for the game you are playing is an integral part of cash games, and anybody who is under-rolled should be at a disadvantage in my opinion and we should not mitigate this. Being able to exploit those who are not is also important in live cash games (I am bad at this btw).

Anyway whatever this rule I am sad not to be playing this and hope to be back to these games soon will certainly try to make the next round of this game at Stoke in Jan, BUT.........

For WCOAP, please, please, please, please, please - if it can be done. APAT - The Cash Game (I know I ask every year *lol*). A no nonsense good old fashioned CASH GAME, a real one, this concept is fun but it is not a true honest to god cash game). Have an entry fee or rake the table but make it a cash game everything goes. I can think of some amazing tables we could get.

It"s not just you.

[s4ooter]

They should have an APAT cash game at worlds. Invite only and streamed. Players can evict someone after 3hrs and 24hrs duration

That would be awesome!!!

[TGBane]

Im still not a fan of the straddle, even less of two.