drneau.com

[MarcoB]

Our poker group has been growing from 6 to almost 30, and we keep adjusting our blind schedule to people's wishes. However you can't satisfy them all.

My primary goal is to let everybody play as many hands as possible, and have a good time without going broke (our buy-in (don't laugh) is $10, we dont allow addons and rebuys.) $10 will buy $2000 in chips so everybody has a pretty good stack.

The tourney last a little over 3 hours (typically 3 1/2). That way we can play 2 tournaments on one night, just to double the fun.

Blind schedule
---------------
30 min, 10/20
20 min, 15/30
20 min, 20/40
20 min, 25/50
15 min, 50/100
15 min, 100/200
15 min, 200/400
15 min, 300/600
10 min, 400/800
10 min, 500/1000
10 min, 1000/2000 (Typicly we leave it on this one until there is a winner)

Chips
---------------
White $5 (300)
Red $10 (300)
Blue $25 (200)
Green $100 (100)
Pink $250 (150)
Purple $500 (100)
Yellow $1000 (50)


What do you guys think?

[MaxPower]

Ya know, that's not a bad idea - low buy ins, two quick games, more fun (and more chance to win). I might need to consult the boys next time they're over...

-Max

I like it!
_________________
Oh, Yeah! Check out the all new TheMiddleClassBlog.com for all of us that aren't exactly "High Rollers"!

[Dix]

The most important questions are...

What do a "majority" of your of your players think? (True, you will NEVER please EVERYONE)

and...

Is it working for you?

Given that you say you've grown from a handful to almost 30, I'd say the answer to the 2nd question is a no-brainer.

I've always been of the opinion that (cliche tho it may be) "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

As a personal observation, the jumps from 50 to 100 and 1000 to 2000 are kind of sudden(given the previous increases)... but then... that along with the decreasing round times are what is likely letting you get two in per night. Mess with it and you may find you are taking too much time to get two of 'em in on one evening.

The general rule of thumb with blind levels is that longer rounds and slower increases will favor tighter, more patient, and more skilled players.

For example, our monthly tourney with a buy-in of $100 starts you with $2000 in chips, uses 25 minute rounds (w/10 min break every 2 rounds), and blind levels of...

[rastapete]

[drneau]

[i8dbear]

another reason could be that his meds were wearing off and the As were speaking to him in tongues.

[Dix]

[drneau]

[rastapete]

Dix, how much of the stack sizes. and payouts can you remember? I'd love to see the numbers on that decision.

[Dix]

The exact lower tier payouts I don't recall at this point... but I'm fairly sure it didn't get to $1,000 until you got to 5th... 20% of the buy-in went to charity... 2nd & 3rd got something like $4000 & $2500 (I took them both out with one hand... see my "player profile" link below or Click Here).... as the winner I took home $6,000. 4th & 5th were likely something like $1500 & $1000.

I was in the CO with about 550,000 (blinds were 2500 & 5000 I think)

UTG(seat 5) - beginning to get short-stacked (maybe 75,000) raises for about 1/3 of his stack.

EP1(seat 6) - fold.

EP2(seat 7) - Very tight player with about 400,000 comes over the top all-in... I put him on a big pair... likely Kings... hoping to isolate the raiser... (which is what I would do... maybe not all-in... but with a real strong re-raise... enough to make him go all-in if he was going to call)

MP1(seat 8 ) - fold

MP2(seat 9) - calls all-in about $150,000

LP(seat 10) - calls all-in about $225,000

CO(me - seat 1) - sat back and thought about it for a bit... went through the math & mental process outlined above... were it not for the two subsequent callers I might have pushed my stack in... but as it stands I'm looking at a 5-way pot if I call (minimum - button & blinds are yet to act - could be 6 or 7 in)... I looked around and said,

"This is either a bad play, or the best laydown in the history of poker."

... and mucked my Aces.

Button & Blinds fold, UTG original raiser calls all-in (as expected).

EP2 had Aces also, not the Kings I suspected. (he ended up out in 7th later)

I don't recall the exact hand LP had at this point, but the original UTG raiser had pocket 10s which hit a straight on the river. MP2's hand was K-K, which spiked a set for the 1st side-pot. So, in the end we only lost the LP caller who lost the other side pot to EP1's Aces.

(pardon the edits... it's taken me a few minutes to remember all the hands and exactly how it all played out... it was about a year ago)

After I got home that night I went to CardPlayer.com's odds calculator and plugged in the hands... the other A-A & I were both 30% to win... in other words, we were roughly 60% to split the pot.

My best memory of the hand was after the pre-flop dust finally settled and the hands were turned over I looked over at the guy with the Aces and told him....

"You better hope those hold-up, I folded both of your outs."

The look on his face was priceless... talk about a Kodak Moment... LOL

All that and I was still the chip leader, and the 2nd stack took about a 75,000 hit.

If you go to the final table photos we're down to 8 at that point. Seat 2 is gone as well as seat 10. You'll also notice that most are getting short-stacked... well... except me... I've got about a million and a half in front of me.

(EDIT: In the top photo seat #2 is still there - orange shirt - & we're at 9 players)

The 2nd stack at that point was the player to my left in seat 3 with about 350,000. Who plays in my regular weekly game & ended up 4th

I had worked up to just shy of a million and Seat 2 had about 500,000 when I played A-Q against his A-K, flopped two pair and called his all-in.

The lucky SOB in seat 5 (black Chevy cap) with the 10s from the above all-in fest, is also a regular in our weekly game. He finished 6th.
_________________
- Dix

[unyostun]

What's CO?

[Dix]

CO = The position just before the button is sometimes called the "Cutoff".

At a full 10-player table the preflop positions are usually referred to as:

UTG - "Under the Gun" - the first to act pre-flop
EP1 - Early Position #1 (Sometimes UTG+1)
EP2 - Early Position #2 (Sometimes UTG+2)
MP1 - Middle Position #1
MP2 - Middle Position #2
LP - Late Position (Sometimes LP1)
CO - Cutoff (Sometimes LP2)
Button - The Dealer's Position
SB - Small Blind
BB - Big Blind
_________________
- Dix

[rastapete]

Apologies to OP for the hijack. To make up for it, let me refer you to Home Poker Tourney for all sorts of advice, including sample blinds and explanations of how to construct a blinds schedule.

I've never done anything like this before. If I've made any glaring errors please feel free to shout them out. The way I calculate it you were getting 2:1 to call (ignoring action behind you). I think your calculation of your equity should not be done with the actual hands, but with the range that you could reasonably put the opponents on. I Pokerstoved it:

67,248,708,072 games 280.523 secs 239,726,183 games/sec

Board:
Dead:

equity (%) win (%) / tie (%)

Hand 1: 13.9144 % [ 00.14 00.00 ] { AA-77, AKs-ATs, KQs-KJs, QJs, JTs, AKo-ATo, KQo-KJo }
Hand 2: 10.4510 % [ 00.09 00.01 ] { AA-QQ, AKs, AKo }
Hand 3: 09.1749 % [ 00.08 00.01 ] { AA-TT, AKs-AQs, AKo-AQo }
Hand 4: 09.1696 % [ 00.08 00.01 ] { AA-TT, AKs-AQs, AKo-AQo }
Hand 5: 57.2901 % [ 00.55 00.02 ] { AA }

Let me know how these ranges look to you. I put the UTG on a fairly wide range, because of his short-stackedness. The tight original raiser that you put on a high pair I put on AA-QQ, but included AK since I think he would play AK the same way (IMO the overbet makes QQ or AK more likely than AA or KK, and may mean JJ with some players, but since he's tight, leave JJ out). The rest I put on high pairs/premium broadways. If your reads on any of these guys would alter the ranges, let me know I'll run it again.

If one of the players left to act comes in, with a range of {AA-TT, AKs-AQs, KQs, QJs-QTs, AKo-ATo, KQo} your equity drops to about 50%, but of course 50% of a bigger pot.

And of course it's actually more than that since you would have equity in four pots, which would be successively higher with each pot. Using the same hand ranges, you actually have (against 5 opponents):

Pot Equity cEV
450k 50% 225k
375k 57% 214k
225k 72% 162k
175k 84% 147k

For a total cEV (chip Expected Value) of 749, or 61%. By the way, if my recollection of your description of the actual results is correct, you would have split pots 3 & 4, so you would have ended up with a stack of 350k (550k-400k+.5(225+175)). Using the results-oriented approach, calling would have cost you 200k for the chance to knock out 4 (edit from 3) players and end up with an enormous stack, maybe 8 times bigger than the next stack, right?

What was the total amount of chips in play? Although I'm focussing on chip equity right now, I think we have to get that right first, then consider $ equity.

I'm not doing this to second-guess you Dix. Folding might be right. I don't think it's a no-brainer though. And I find the exercise useful in its own right. If you don't want to take it any further though, n.p.

[Dix]

Yea... sorry we hijacked your thread Marco.... I should have known... the topic of this hand always sparks this kind of discussion... LOL

The original all-in tightass was definately Kings in my mind... only because I had Aces... what were the odds of him having the other two? Otherwise I would have thought Aces OR Kings. I'd played with him sitting just to my left for over 7 hours at the first table I was at. Also, we ended up at the same table when it got down to 20 so I had a very good read on him. He couldn't have had anything other than a big pair... He'd not have pushed all-in with anything less.

The total amount of chips in play was about $2.5M. At the last hand I had about $2,000,000 and the other two stacks were about $350,000 and $150,000. While all 146 started with $10,000 there was a $10,000 add-on at the noon lunch break. No re-buys, but as long as you were alive at noon you could add-on $10,000 for $50, with the understanding that the full $50 of the add-on was not going to the prize pool, but directly to the charity.

Anyway....

I have no fault with your analysis Pete... none at all... it's spot on...

...for a cash player at a cash table.

Like I said... were it a cash game, my stack would likely have beaten the others into the pot.

But tourneys are not cash games... what is a good play over the long haul at a cash table may not be so smart at a tourney... because in a tourney you have a finite life-span, and may not come up against certain hands/situations enough times for it to payoff.

Hence... when talking tourneys, the term "EV" or "Expected Value" is really of little value. There are many times in a tourney that the cards you have in your hand are of little importance relative to the situation.

Cash games and tourneys, while both technically the same game (Texas Hold'Em) are really an apples and oranges comparison and are best played VERY differently.

Yes... I had A-A... the best starting hand in Hold'Em... and were I up against a single opponent (or MAYBE two) absolutely, count me in.

But against multiple opponents in a multi-way melee, you're ASKING for your Aces to get cracked.

Which is why you never "slow-play" Aces unless you're down to heads-up.

At a full table the AVERAGE winning hand is two pair... your pocket Aces are only one.

I've lost count of the number of guys I've busted out of tourneys when they call me to the river with TopPair-AceKicker and three or four players saw the flop.

Tournament poker is MUCH more "situational" than a cash game. And there's no odds/EV calculator that can evaluate a "situation". "Doing the math" and "crunching the numbers", while important to know how to do well and good information to help in making a decision, is only one piece of any situational puzzle, and is a much smaller part of successful tournament play.

This is why people like Jennifer Harmon (who readily admits to being completly ignorant of the math) can do so well... they can read people and situations almost like they are inside your head.

I've laid down what I've figured was likely the best hand on the flop more than a few times. Because at the time, to continue might be risky, and there's likely better opportunities to come.

For example, down to three handed.... you flop top pair with the board showing possible straight and/or flush draws... a shorter stack moves all-in obviously on the draw... do you call?

Do you risk doubling him up now... or do you lay it down knowing that the way he's been playing you can outplay him later and rather than double him up now you'd rather just give him the relatively small pot which doesn't help his stack all that much?

Consider the following...