Alright, so I know there has been some discussion at the last EK tournament in regards to payout structures and everything like that, so instead of it getting buried in a localized thread or something, I figured, why not bring it out, have some actual discussion and everything.
Kevin AKA SGFighter AKA Cookie Carnage posted this idea in the PDX Casuals thread
Proposed idea by SGFighter
Spoiler
And here is another idea I came up with
proposed idea by Slash
Spoiler
Based of $10 entry/into pot results
<=16 Players
70/20/10 split
$112/$32/$16
17-24 Entrants
65/20/10/5 split
MIN
$110.5/$34/$17/$8.5
MAX
$156/$48/$24/$12
25-<=32 Entrants
Payout top 4 + 5-8 entry back
65/20/10/5
MIN
250-40=210
$136.5/$42/$21/$10.5
MAX
320-40=280
$182/$56/$28/$14
33-<=64 Entrants
Payout Top 6, 7-8 entry back
60/15/10/7/4/4
MIN
330-20=310
$186/$46.5/$31/$21.7/$12.4/$12.4
MAX
640-20=620
$372/$93/$62/$43.4/24.8/24.8
>65 Entrants
Payout Top 8,9-16 entry back
650-80=570
53/13/10/8/5/5/3/3
$302.1/$74./$57/$45.6/$28.5/$28.5/$17.1/$17.1
Pretty much my thoughts. I suppose I wouldn’t super hate people getting their entry fee back based somewhat on what you have above, but I can’t think anyone cares too much. The loss of 10$ to those players isn’t much, but the loss of 10-80$ or whatever to the people that actually won is fairly significant.
Yeah, I mean to be real, I think paying out top 16 (9-16 getting their fees back) isn’t necessarily cool, but IDK, I just want to hear peoples ideas and what they think.
Only way I see it working is if there’s an extra something added to the Top 3 to still make it worth shooting for. Be it sponsor-added money, extra prize, whatever.
I think the personal expectations of players who enter will lower and they probably wouldn’t try as hard knowing that if they screwed up, they’d just get their money back. The fact of going two-and-out and have nothing to show for it is, IMO, a pretty good motivator to play harder. Don’t blur the casual/hardcore boundaries, I guess.
I must agree. Don’t do what games have started to do now. Don’t reward the losers. Stop lowering the bar. Top 8 is bullshit. Kind of a" no child left behind " g dubya bush idea. Make people try hard to get DAT mulah and don’t degrade the places!
Some ppl play games fo da money& fame but I think most agree that’s just a bonus. Its about and I quote" bitch im going in! Im going in and ima go hard!" - young weezy, and being the best. Being better then the next guy. And we all know 2nd place and 3rd are bullshit. Its just an excuse to say hey im not the best but im pretty close to it.
Should be winner takes all" to the winner go the spoils" but its not that way so im happy with 70/20/10
Hmm, perhaps a top 8 statement would be good to do for major/large scale tournaments and perhaps keep top 3 or top 4 payout to smaller local tournaments (BW/GC/EG/GK/etc.)?
Yeah, I think the only time you should be considering giving something to top 8/16 whatever is when you have a super huge tournament (like 150+ people, probably even 200+) and sponsored prizes/etc to go with it.
At Majors, I like the extended payout structure more just based on the high variance in such a tournament, but I think even they are getting that extra money independent of the pot.
I can see paying 4th their entry fee but that’s it everyone after 4th ties with someone and if you can’t get to a place where you don’t tie with someone too bad.
ONLY at majors can I see a real extended payout structure considering sponsorships and the amount of cash in the pot.
I think 1st place should only get money…People actually caring about if they get a percentage after 3rd place need to stop playing video games & get a damn job…
Good idea for a major. Local tournament it would be more iffy. From what I’ve heard, the goal of this poker style payout structure is to get more participants (because there is more incentive to actually enter a tournament). The idea is that the top finishers get more money as opposed to the regular top 3 payouts because of the increased entries.
In reality, I don’t know if this concept actually works since I’ve never been to a tournament that does this. Honestly, I don’t think this payout structure would work but you never know. Wouldn’t hurt to try it once or twice. It’s ignorant to dismiss this off the bat.
I don’t see how its worth breaking tradition so one extra guy gets his entry fee back. IMO you’ve made peace with losing that entry fee when you enter the tournament, then you’re playing to win and also prize money, your entry fee is not prize money. I don’t see the point, but I’m not hating on you guys trying new ideas.
Battle for Seattle will have raffle drawings any participant can win, that will help casuals ‘get’ something without diluting the prestige of top 3. That’s not feasible at regular small tournies though, cus who would foot the bill for the prizes?
Thanks for making this thread and getting this discussion going. When Kevin made the original post he actually just tried to make the math easier for everyone to understand. So when he posted this:
The total payout equals 100% of the pot. There isn’t any remaining amount. As the number of players increase, the percentages change and adjust accordingly in order for players to receive their entrance fee back. Essentially all that is happening is subtracting 30% from 1st place and redistributing to pay 4th-8th place. The payout cannot exceed 100% of the pot.
This is a pay structure they have been using in Singapore with great success. While 1st place does take 30% less, the amount of players that entered their tournaments increased drastically. So think about it this way, 1st place can take 70% of a pot of 20 players (which is about average in PDX) which equals $140. Or 1st place can take 40% of a pot of 50 players which equals $200. I think this is at least worth trying out for a few months to give it a fair chance. If we can increase our player base and pay more people more money (including 1st place) everybody wins.