Author Topic: Pay structure for re-entry tournament  (Read 8457 times)

Steven

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 68
Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« on: April 06, 2014, 02:48:03 AM »
Are you all treating re-entries as new players when computing the payout structure for a single day event?

That is, if the tournament has 150 players and 25 of the players re-entered one time, and 2 other players re-entered 2 times, will you now use 150 (the registered players) or 179 (I.e., 150+25+4) entries when determining how many players to pay?

So, if you're nominally paying 10%, will you now nominally pay 15 spots or 18 spots?

I think I know what appears to be the norm, but I'm looking to verify that norm, or look for any variations from that norm!

Thanks!

Tristan

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 453
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2014, 08:12:00 AM »
Hi Steven,

I treat re-entries the same way I do entries.  So in your example, I would base my payouts on 179 entries.  From 161-200 I pay 18 spots.  Hope this helps!
Tristan
@TristanWilberg on Twitter

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 734
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2014, 01:56:02 PM »
FWIW:  I think the TDA should leave the payout structure up to the individual event operator.  Getting into payout structure seems to me to be a potential slippery slope and I would rather see the TDA restrict itself to the "rules of the game".  That said, I see nothing wrong with coming up with something in the area of "Recommended Procedures" that covers this subject, I just don't think it should be in the "TDA Rules". 

Chet

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2014, 06:27:31 PM »
I have to agree with Chet here. I'm not sure it's something that needs to be put into the 'official' rules.  There's a trend to flatten payouts generally anyways, and there may be a point where we have multiple generally accepted payout structures.

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #4 on: April 08, 2014, 07:51:09 AM »
I have to agree with Chet here. I'm not sure it's something that needs to be put into the 'official' rules.  There's a trend to flatten payouts generally anyways, and there may be a point where we have multiple generally accepted payout structures.
 Not disagreeing with anyone on this. However the TDA has taken a stand on buy-in policies (Rule 7). On that basis it's not so far-fetched that it might take a stand on payout policies as well, perhaps not as a rule but as a recommended procedure. Food for thought.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2014, 07:55:53 AM by MikeB »

chet

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 734
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2014, 03:18:16 PM »
Mike:  I think it is a stretch to say that TDA Rule #7 applies to "Buy-In" policies, at least in my opinion.  I believe the purpose of TDA #7 was to standardize the number of chips a player would receive if the event allowed late registrations, alternates and/or re-entries.  I know there were venues who would reduce the number of chips an individual in one of the three situations to reflect the number of "missed blinds" such an individual might have had.  That practice however was very cumbersome, if not totally unworkable, hence the rule. 

Are you then implying the TDA should set a standard that all events should start with chip stakes equal to 3 times the buy-in?  or,
that all events should have a minimum buy-in of X hundred/thousand dollars, I think not?

I stand by my original post, I think the TDA should not include payout structure in the rules.  A recommendation in the procedures area or better yet a "suggestion" as opposed to a recommendation I think is a much better option.

Chet

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2014, 09:09:18 PM »
I also agree with Chet. I don't believe that buy-in's, or number of players for final tables should fall under TDA Rules. I prefer Chet's suggestion: recommend procedures.

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
  • Poker Manager
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2015, 03:50:04 AM »
Are you all treating re-entries as new players when computing the payout structure for a single day event?
...
Thanks!

One of the principles of a "re-entry" tournament opposed to a "re-buy" tournament is that all entries are treated like a brand new player, therefore they are seated randomly and according to table balancing needs just as a new player would.  They pay house fees and dealer fees again, and if there were alternates they are at the bottom of the alternate list.  50 original buy-ins with 10 of them re-entering should count as 60 total entries. 

WSOPMcGee

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 334
    • The R.O.P.E.
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2015, 02:21:49 AM »
Two voices of reason. Chet and Brian. [Golf clap]
@wsopmcgee on Twitter

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2015, 12:47:36 PM »
I will be the voice of discord then! 8)
There is one small standardization that I think should be implemented.  The the differences in payout must always increase in percentage as the field is reduced.  
Example of BAD structure.

1st 20%
2nd 15%
3rd 12%
4th 8%<------
5th 7.5%<-----
6th 5%
7th 4%
and so on.
The problem here is that from 6th to 5th I gain 2.5% of the prize pool and from 5th to 4th I only gain 0.5%  This is ridiculous! And I have seen sooooo many structures like this it's painful.  Structures like this cause collusion and soft play.  Trust me. I've been there.

Proposed rule
All payouts structures must have incremental percentage bases that are the same or increase as the prizes are awarded
This is worded poorly... :'(

Uniden32

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
  • Tournament Director at the Isle Casino
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #10 on: July 10, 2015, 06:40:32 AM »
We do a lot of re-entry tournaments here at the Isle, ranging anywhere from $75 - $2,500.

On thing we've adopted for our fields of 750+ (generally any $570 or below multiday) is to payout based on unique entries.

We go through each Flight's entries, and only count each individual's entries as one entry for each Day/Flight.  If John Smith enters Flight A seven times, we count that as one entry for total entries for payout purposes.  If John plays Flight B, six times, we'll only count it as one again, so now we've counted John as two entries.

We would have total entries of 1,490 (415 Re-entries), and would payout based on 1,075 total entries.  Instead of paying out 150 places, our unique entry scale would pay 110.

We've instituted this unique entry payout for about 4 years now, and have had an overwhelming positive response from the players on it.
Ralph Brandt
Tournament Coordinator
Isle Casino - Pompano Beach, FL
@uniden32

Brian Vickers

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
  • Poker Manager
Re: Pay structure for re-entry tournament
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2015, 03:32:30 PM »
I will be the voice of discord then! 8)
There is one small standardization that I think should be implemented.  The the differences in payout must always increase in percentage as the field is reduced.  
Example of BAD structure.

1st 20%
2nd 15%
3rd 12%
4th 8%<------
5th 7.5%<-----
6th 5%
7th 4%
and so on.
The problem here is that from 6th to 5th I gain 2.5% of the prize pool and from 5th to 4th I only gain 0.5%  This is ridiculous! And I have seen sooooo many structures like this it's painful.  Structures like this cause collusion and soft play.  Trust me. I've been there.

Proposed rule
All payouts structures must have incremental percentage bases that are the same or increase as the prizes are awarded
This is worded poorly... :'(

You're definitely right with the point you're trying to get across here: Can't jump 3% then jump 2% for next payout spot.