Tourney Check my blind schedule (1 Viewer)

[tabletalker7]

Looking at holding bounty tournaments once all this COVID-19 nonsense is over with.
Starting stacks:
10 x T5
10 X T25
7 X T100
2 X T500.

Hoping to get 2 to 3 hours with ten players. How do things look here?

 

[BGinGA]

I pretty much hate it, and wouldn't play. Nothing to do with the bounty aspect, it's just that the proposed blind levels lacks sound structure or logical progression.

As presented, it will typically run no longer than 2:45 (L11) plus three color-up breaks. But the blinds increase at wildly different rates, ranging from massive and intermittent 100% jumps to small 25% increments, averaging 61% over the course of the event. And even though players appear to be starting with relatively deep 200BB stacks, it is an illusion while actually dropping to just 67BB (turbo status) after only 30 minutes of play. Having three 100% increases in the first six levels means those 200BB stacks are quickly decimated to being only worth ten big blinds, making the event a relative crap-shoot early-on and all-in fest by midway through the tournament. There are better ways to run a short-duration tournament without invoking panic mode so early in the event (or at all).

The structure below also starts with 200BB and finishes by L11 (2:45 plus two breaks), but in doing so, maintains a gradual and narrow range of blind increases (50% to 67%, averaging 59%). Starting stack size is T4000 (10/10/7/4), with 10/20 opening blinds and 15-minute levels, and will result in a much more enjoyable and less luck-dependent experience:

lvl sb bb
L1 10 20
L2 15 30
L3 25 50
L4 40 80
L5 60 120
remove T5 chips
L6 100 200
L7 150 300
L8 250 500
remove T25 chips
L9 400 800
L10 600 1200
remove T100 chips
L11 1000 2000 ***eot
L12 1500 3000
L13 2500 5000
L14 4000 8000
L15 6000 12000

Alternatively, the structure below also typically finishes by L11 (2:45 plus breaks), but accomplishes this by starting the blinds at 15/30 while keeping the starting stack sizes at T2000 (67BB), but also significantly decreasing the aggression level of the blind increases (generally 33% to 50%, averaging 40%). It lacks the deepstack feel of 200 starting big blinds, but maintains a playable stack size for much longer, also resulting in a more enjoyable experience with less of an urgent luck-fest feel:

lvl sb bb
L1 15 30
L2 20 40
L3 30 60
L4 40 80
L5 60 120
remove T5 chips
L6 75 150
L7 100 200
L8 150 300
remove T25 chips
L9 200 400
L10 300 600
L11 400 800 ***eot
L12 600 1200
L13 800 1600
remove T100 chips
L14 1000 2000
L15 1500 3000
L16 2000 4000

 

[Poker Zombie]

No matter how you slice it, a 2 hour tournament for 10 players is going to be a luck-fest, unless you are playing online. Table banter, counting stacks, and shuffling all takes time. I mean, if you think about it, someone has to be eliminated (on average) every 13.3 minutes. Since few people are ever eliminated in the early levels (Big Blind/Starting Stack > 30) you would see few to no KOs in your first 4 levels. That means over the next hour, you would need to knock someone out every 6 minutes. Figure it takes about 2 minutes to play a hand, and you will need to eliminate a player every 3 hands on average.

That is going to slow the game even more, as there will be side pots that need to be counted frequently, resulting in even less time between hands.

I strongly prefer tournaments to cash games, but unless you have 3-4 hours to play, I would consider a cash game.

If you are committed to a tournament, BG's second structure is much better, but I would remove the 5's after L4, and make L5 50/100. This doesn't have the smooth mathematical progression BG prefers, but it has evenly spaced breaks, which works better with social players. It also has a "chip-logical" progression. the 60-120 stacking so many 5's every pot, and will waste time making change as BG's L5 requires each player to have at least six 5s just to fold the blinds in one orbit, and eight 5's just to limp in. With a starting stack of just ten 5s, you can see how much time will be spent making change if you don't have an agressive bunch of players.

 

[tabletalker7]

After group texting with a number of my regulars it has been determined that a tournament should be a little longer than I first thought. Check out the changes please.

I think each break will ramp up pressure on small stacks some - I don't know how this will work out though. Forgive me but we are usually micro stakes cash at my place so I have very little experience making tournaments (hence the starting stacks - not investing serious cash into a tournament set if it won't see serious use). Break 1 color up 5's. Break 3 color up 25's.

 

[BGinGA]

Same issue as your first schedule -- too many 100% increases, combined with increases as small as just 20%.

Did you even read any of the previous responses? I feel like I'm either wasting my time, or you're trolling us.

 

[JustinInMN]

To adjust the length of a tournament your three "levers" are

1) Starting stack
2) Level times
3) Level increase rate

Generally, I don't like using the third 3rd lever if it causes doubling of the blinds (which is essentially halving everyone's stacks.)

This is the issue we are seeing with both your schedules so far. You have two doubles in the structure from 25-50 to 50-100 and 5-10 to 10-20.

Personally, I favor setup levels that repeat a 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12, 8-16 progression. No doubles, smooth increases.

So I think your base T5 structure should be something like
10-20, 15-30, 20-40, 30-60, 40-80, 50-100. (Avoid the temptation to color up as soon as you can make a 1 chip-2chip level of the next chip, which forces you have to double the next level)

So lay it out this way and decide how many levels you can play in the time.

10-20, 15-30, 20-40, 30-60, 40-80, (color up T5) 50-100, 75-150, 100-200, 150-300 (color up T25), 200-400, 300-600, 400-800, 600-1200, 800-1600

Okay so with the levels determined, see how many you call play in the time allotted. Let's say 3 hours. Personally, I think 16 minutes a level is the bare minimum for a live tournament. So 11 levels fits in 3 hours so 200-400 should be the last level give or take. Our rule of thumb is tournaments generally end with about 20Bb in play. 20 * 300 is 8000 chips in play. Divided by 10 entries means a starting stack of 800.

I know most players like events with 100BB or more, but that's just never practical for short single table tournaments. Really 40-60BB is all that should be expected for time constricted events.

You could skip 40-80, 30-60 to 50-100 is a big increase but not quite a double. That would let you play 300-600 as the assumed last level, meaning you ideally want 12K in play or T1200 starting stacks per player (10/10/9 or 10/10/4/1)

So to recap, assuming a base 5 stack, I would do 16 minute levels , T800 strating stacks and following the smoother progression I suggested.

 

[FordPickup92]

Dave is it possible for you to say anything constructive without being negative and nasty?

 

[Poker Zombie]

Dave is it possible for you to say anything constructive without being negative and nasty?

He has a point though. I know I spent time in my spreadsheet to help. I spent about an hour working different scenarios, and looking at the various aspects including Chip-use to Starting-stack Ratios, tournament timing, the "crush" levels (Starting Stack/BB = 12 to 20), and incremental increases. I don't just throw numbers down and call it good.

In the end, I came up with something very similar to BG's response, and noted the one change I would have made. That was an hour of my time just thrown away if he's just going to ignore Dave's work, and that doesn't count any time Dave spent on his 2 ideas, plus the time spent writing the reply. Obviously, nobody is required to use my ideas (though they are always well thought out), and I don't mind debating them. But to blatantly ignore my time is an insult.

So Dave wasn't being negative and nasty first.

 

[FordPickup92]

He has a point though. I know I spent time in my spreadsheet to help. I spent about an hour working different scenarios, and looking at the various aspects including Chip-use to Starting-stack Ratios, tournament timing, the "crush" levels (Starting Stack/BB = 12 to 20), and incremental increases. I don't just throw numbers down and call it good.

In the end, I came up with something very similar to BG's response, and noted the one change I would have made. That was an hour of my time just thrown away if he's just going to ignore Dave's work, and that doesn't count any time Dave spent on his 2 ideas, plus the time spent writing the reply. Obviously, nobody is required to use my ideas (though they are always well thought out), and I don't mind debating them. But to blatantly ignore my time is an insult.

So Dave wasn't being negative and nasty first.

Saying I hate it and wouldnt play, isnt really nice. He could've left that part out. Also seems like the guy was looking to start at T5 with 5/10 blinds given both his scenarios mention that and neither of Dave's do, maybe he didn't like Dave's suggestion? I dunno why he didnt acknowledge the changes Dave mentioned. But if you dont want to be upset that someone didnt appreciate your time dont comment, then you wont have wasted your time. I've watched Ben do tons of breakdowns I know it takes time, so I could understand being upset, but perhaps if the message was more pleasant to begin with he may have not gotten ignored. I'm not really trying to start a fight it just bothers me, were grown adults here. Maybe hes new and doesnt know, idk how old the person is. And you want to start out with I hate it, and wouldnt play? Great. Because you weren't invited anyway

 

[Mr Winberg]

The following is a matter of preference, but if I had too little time to have a decent structure, then I would start more shallow. The time spent splashing around with 200 BBs is better spent during the mid game, IMO. Also, have shorter breaks. If you are playing 3h total, you don't need a total of 45 minutes for breaks.

Using my advice above, I would use @BGinGA's 1st structure but with T2k stacks. That's 100BBs, so a middle ground between his two suggestions.

lvl sb bb
L1 10 20
L2 15 30
L3 25 50
L4 40 80
L5 60 120
remove T5 chips
L6 100 200
L7 150 300
L8 250 500
remove T25 chips
L9 400 800
L10 600 1200
remove T100 chips

Should end around level 9. 10 minutes is enough for the first break, 5 for the second. For a 3h tourney, that leaves 165 minutes of poker. I'd have 20 minutes for levels 1-6 and 15 for the rest. At level 7 there shouldn't be more than 3 or 4 players left, so reducing time is ok.

it has been determined that a tournament should be a little longer than I first thought

That's good news, how long?

If it's one more hour, I would add a 80/160 level, and spend the rest on increased level durations.

If it's two more hours, I'd start deeper.

 

[tabletalker7]

The following is a matter of preference, but if I had too little time to have a decent structure, then I would start more shallow. The time spent splashing around with 200 BBs is better spent during the mid game, IMO. Also, have shorter breaks. If you are playing 3h total, you don't need a total of 45 minutes for breaks.

Using my advice above, I would use @BGinGA's 1st structure but with T2k stacks. That's 100BBs, so a middle ground between his two suggestions.

lvl sb bb
L1 10 20
L2 15 30
L3 25 50
L4 40 80
L5 60 120
remove T5 chips
L6 100 200
L7 150 300
L8 250 500
remove T25 chips
L9 400 800
L10 600 1200
remove T100 chips

Should end around level 9. 10 minutes is enough for the first break, 5 for the second. For a 3h tourney, that leaves 165 minutes of poker. I'd have 20 minutes for levels 1-6 and 15 for the rest. At level 7 there shouldn't be more than 3 or 4 players left, so reducing time is ok.


That's good news, how long?

If it's one more hour, I would add a 80/160 level, and spend the rest on increased level durations.

If it's two more hours, I'd start deeper.

I started out thinking 2.5 hours tops, but after talking with some of my players I am learning 3.5 hours average is desirable, and please forgive my stupidity. If I just copy someone else's schedule I learn nothing, so I gotta figure this out so I learn (the whole give a man a fish vs teach him to fish thing).

@BGinGA please add me to your ignore list. I have been on this site for 9 months now and whenever we seem to interact you are always trolling me. You may be smart and you may you your stuff, but the way you talk to me makes me want nothing to do with you and it has been that way since day 1.

@JustinInMN I never thought to use round times to help increase tournament play time (I rarely ever play tournaments I usually stick to cash). Good idea thanks.

 

[tabletalker7]

OK I am thinking of blind levels here less in terms on dollars and more in terms of percentage jumps. No jump here is bigger than 50%. When all of my players are smokers (that happens very often) I allow smoking, and that makes break 1 completely negotiable. Break 2 color up 5. Break 3 color up 25. With only ten players I see third place person eliminated in Round 12 or 13. How does this look?

 

[BGinGA]

Much better. With T2000 stacks (200BB), the tournament will typically end no later than L14 (3.5 hours plus breaks), so you probably want to add an extra level or two just in case they're needed. L2 jump is 100%, fwiw.

 

[Poker Zombie]

100% jump in an early level is acceptable for me. It's a little like a 100 BB tournament, but you get a "free" level to start feeling out opponents, settle in, and B.S with your friends before the shit gets real. It's also extremely common in casinos (though that isn't always a positive).

Around level 8 you will lose... basically 50% of the field. This gives your friends 2 hours of play, which is acceptable in my book. The step to level 9 will finish off the players that hover around the starting stack, and they will feel like they got run over by the blinds. Expect minor gripes, but nothing is really wrong.

I would give every player an opportunity to look over the blinds just to be fair. A tournament like this requires more aggression early, because you won't stand a chance otherwise.

 

[JustinInMN]

I do like @tabletalker7 's latest incarnation as well. My only concern with shortening the levels to 15 minutes is it gets pretty difficult for the deck to make at least one orbit per level unless we are really only talking 7-8 handed here. If it's a 9-10 handed game, I would really prefer 18 minute levels and shortening the starting stack when time is limited.

But the main point is the blinds in this version are much smoother.

100% jump in an early level is acceptable for me. It's a little like a 100 BB tournament, but you get a "free" level to start feeling out opponents, settle in, and B.S with your friends before the shit gets real. It's also extremely common in casinos (though that isn't always a positive).

That's how I tend to look at this as well. That initial double isn't a dealbreaker for me, but there really aren't any good reasons to have doubles anywhere else in the structure. After every color up, the first level should never be 1-2 of the newest chip in play, which as I said above, practically forces you to put in a double. (All that said, I still prefer 5-10, 5-15, 10-20 at the outset to avoid the early double, but again, not a dealbreaker.)

 

[JustinInMN]

I do see a few tweaks if you need to speed it up:

Remove Level 1, start at 10-20
Remove Level 6, break after 30-60 and color up T5
Remove break 2 entirely. (with the above changes it's still 4 levels on then break)

 

[tabletalker7]

I do see a few tweaks if you need to speed it up:

Remove Level 1, start at 10-20
Remove Level 6, break after 30-60 and color up T5
Remove break 2 entirely. (with the above changes it's still 4 levels on then break)

I see my players more desiring slow down vs speed up. If that happens I will change round length to 20 minutes.