UB $100+ LeaderBoard for 2006 -- Feedback Needed
Okay it's time folks to talk about the Leader Board for next year. Let's assume the following: The leaderboard will continue to just be Ultimate Bet and will only cover $100 and up tournaments. If I run expanded leader boards (not sure yet if that's possible), then those will be at pokerxfactor.com.
Question: Should I include Rebuys? Offhand, I don't want to because of the extra work and because a rebuy tournament is so different from other tournaments. But it's something to consider. There would have to be some minimum prize pool to qualify. I'm leaning against.
Question: Should we redo the formula?
Here is the current formula.
The answer here is yes I think. Right now there is a small bonus for the entry fee of a tournament. So a $200 tournament winner gets more bonus points compared to a $100 tournament winner. The logic here is a $200 tourney would be harder to win so a bonus is appropriate. But in reality, because the $200s have larger fields (as well the Stone Cold Nuts $500), there are already bonuses for the top winners.
So I'm in favor of eliminating any bonus based on entry fees. Agree?
Next, we've had a number of people say that we don't reward enough bonus points for making the final table. We currently give: 1st +15, 2nd +10, 3rd +7, 4th +5, 5th +2, 6th thru 10th +1.
I think the points should be raised. I don't think we should go nuts here but a final table should get more significant bonuses over the second ten (more than +1). I suggest the following change:
1st +30
2nd +20
3rd +15
4th +12
5th +10
6th thru 10th +5
Please post your thoughts!
I went a couple of hours into the $200 last night but it was terribly boring. Just got whittled down and down, finally going out KK vs AK. Mostly I didn't get action when I had cards, which wasn't often. I did lose another big hand against 84 when I flopped a straight (again from the blind) and eventually the guy made a higher straight. Maybe I'll start playing 84 off.
In the afternoon $100 I made a horrible play to go out. I limped in with 55 as did like four others! But shockingly, it checked around after the flop and then the turn, then I hit my 5 on the river! Cool. But then the small blind bet $400. I quickly reraised and then she put me all-in. Yikes! So I'm looking at the board and I see that there is in fact one hand only to fear (unless she slow played some higher trips, which didn't seem likely for some reason). If she had 4 6 she'd have a straight. So I ask her, 4-6, really? Or something like that. I finally couldn't get away from the hand, call, and she flips 46. It really was something I should have been able to lay down.
UB has a $30 rebuy tonight, which should be fun. Good luck all!
4 Comments:
Hey Mindwise,
I agree with more bonus for FT and less for buy-in. I don't play rebuys often so have no opinion on that.
Keep up the good work!
PSP1
Mind,
Great job in 2005! Thanks for creating something for all of us. I think your ideas for the extra FT points are perfect. Your right, the $200 tourney already rewards with more points so i think you should get rid of that extra squirt on those.
As far as rebuys, i think that is a whole different class of tournaments (which may not be consistently run either) and you should just leave it to the $100 and up buy-in MTT's.
Thanks again,
klslcz
The most important thing in poker is $ at the end of the day. While most days I just get a lot of heartache and laughs we should all be focusing on ROI/t as far as poker statistics. So the formula should be proportional to the prize money being awarded. I have really done terrible in the 200's after being a chip leader and getting kings and aces cracked within 20 minutes in the final three tables six weeks ago, but no doubt this tourny is much more important than a 100 with bigger fields and therefore more than double prize money. So the formula should represent this fact. The other factor is a way to incorporate time. I know some of these guys on the leader board play way more than others. So I think you should figure a way into balancing that out a little. For example on Pokerstars they cap the year at 100 scores. So after you reach 100 they start throwing out your low score if you have a personal top 100 performance for the year. I bring this up, because you want the ranking to reflect the top poker players on the site, not just the one who plays the most.
Thanks for making poker that much more entertaining an making me a degenerate gambler while tuning into my favorite sporting event mindwise, LOL.
Mindwise,
I agree with Trihawk based on the fact that some of these players play much more than others. It would be very interesting if you had an overall leaderboard, and a seperate leaderboard/tournaments entered ratio, if at all possible. It might show us who some of the better players are who play 1/2 or 1/4 as much as the regular pros.
Post a Comment
<< Home