Hosting next STT game next Saturday. We've been playing STTs since college in 2003 with the same 9 guys. We have never used antes. I want to add a BBA just to keep in compliance with casino/online play and I suppose juice the pot and induce more action? Besides having enough chips/change, etc. is there a reason not to do this? I've seen people say to not use an ante if less than 15 players, why is that? How will adding a BBA to a STT change the game? We use 25,000 starting stack with 10/8/10/2 of 100/500/1000/5000. Will game end sooner?
-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
Tourney STT BBA (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Defarse
- Start date
Legend5555
Full House
I always use it from level 1 no matter the tourney size. There is no reason not to if you want to keep it similar to casino/tour tournaments. It in theory speeds things up. In practice, unless people know how to adjust to an ante, it doesn't make much difference.
That sounds good. Yeah, I would definitely start it at level 1 and run for the duration. I'm in Minnesota and there are two main card rooms, Canterbury Park and Running Aces. Running Aces still doesn't start antes until like level 6 or something. I remember when BBA first was introduced and you would see MTTs have the BBA until like the final 27 and then switch back to the traditional ante. Or changing the ante amount when it reached the final 4.........it all just didn't matter and you mostly see the BBA for the entire tournament now.
If using a BBA, I recommend starting it at L2 or L3. I also recommend converting it to a half-BBA value once down to 4 or 5 players, and eliminating it completely once play is heads-up, but this is in contrast to common casino practice (but better for most home games).
You will need stacks larger than 10/8/10/2 to accomodate the extra chips required to post a BBA. I'd go with 35k stacks of 15/7/15/3 (40 chips) using T5000s for all color-ups, which will finish in about the same time as your current structure.
What's the reasoning behind reducing it and eliminating when heads up? Why is this better for a home game? Why not keep 2.5bb blinds/ante per hand throughout?
Reducing the total ante amount when the # of players has decreased keeps the total ante amount in alignment as the total posted if it were done with individual antes. Keeping it equal to the big blind throughout regardless of table size distorts the intent of antes, and places a greater demand on stacks -- essentially changing the intended game dynamics.
Legend5555
Full House
It's not necessarily bad though. As you said, it changes dynamics. Players just need to adjust, much like adjusting to a straddled pot, or stand up game in cash.
@Defarse In the end, it all comes down to preference. I think tournaments play better when there is more pressure to play hands and win pots because of the ante. No limit hold em traditionally was always played with an ante. It wasn't until online poker came along that the ante was eliminated in NL cash games.
As I noted earlier, less experienced players don't really adjust correctly to the ante. They won't adjust their ranges for it. They won't try to steal more often. But I've played a decent amount with people that understand the dynamics, and playing without an ante in a tourney causes MUCH tighter play.
Hell, I played a tourney they other day where everyone started with 7k and the house did a 10k splash at each table on the first hand. It was a 7 way limped pot at my table. That shouldn't have happened. What's silly about it, is that if I had jammed pre (which I probably could have in theory), I would have gotten called. But the other players wouldn't take that aggressive action themselves. So I took the free flop from the BB with A6s and won a checked down pot with TP.
Point being, people don't adjust. So whether you use an ante in a home game or not is largely irrelevant outside of being consistent with casinos or in the event you have a lot of players that play a decent amount of casino tournaments.
As far as starting stacks, casinos don't start you with more because of the ante. And those run just fine. But if you have extra, using 15 T100 and 4 T500 (instead of the casino tradition of 10 and 2) to start is a good idea. T1k and T5k don't matter as much because by the time they hit the ante, chips will have consolidated a good bit. Using more than 4 T500 per player is just not necessary. It's the most useless chip denomination since it's only half of the next chip.
How about a big blind ante that is twice the big blind. I think in a cash game this would lead to crazy loose action but in a tourney even with such a big ante, people would play relative tight because of ICM considerations.
I'd argue that that is just what the game has morphed into. Outside of a heads up specific tournament like the WSOP $25K or High Stakes Duel, you will see a BBA throughout the entire tournament. So, whenever you register an event at a casino, or watch an MTT on TV/stream, or are studying a training course.......in all of these there will be a BBA in play short handed and heads-up......so it would be beneficial to use this is your own game to stay current in strategies and ideas.
Casino events run just fine because of very competent dealers making change on almost every hand. I do have enough chips but I'm going to go kicking and screaming because my OCD and having a rack each for 400 chips in a Nanuk 910 is nice to look at, but I guess there is zero good reasons to not have 15 100s in the starting stack as opposed to 10. We do three three hour STT when we play, 25,000 starting stacks on the first two and I think we will go to 40,000 for the last 'Main Event'. Instead of 10/8/10/2 I think I'll go to 15/7/10/2. Rebuys with all 5k chips. I suppose I could have 400 chips of 140/80/100/80.
@BGinGA found your preferences (if still relevant as this post was in 2020):
Personally, I would not:
- use more than 10 x T100 (unless antes are in play)
- use fewer than 5 x T500 (if no re-buys) or fewer than 7x T500 (if using T5000 chips for re-buys)
- use more than 1x T5000 for a 20k stack
- 10/8/10/1
- 10/6/11/1
- 15/7/10/1
Legend5555
Full House
That's different than what was being discussed. There is a breaking point for any type of player.
This already kinda happens in cash games with the straddle.
A big BBA in a tourney will cause people to play even more aggressive pre in the easily stages, and exacerbate the chip advantage in the later stages when ICM becomes a factor. But it will also incentivize short stacks to try and jam and win more often as they will pick up 3.5bb instead of 2.5.
buzzmonkey
Flush
I do a bit of a mix of this. We start BBA at level 1, but it's the size of the BB if any table has 6 or more players and drops to the size of the SB once any table drops to 5 or less. If a table breaks and we were at the SB size, then it goes back to BB until the above criteria is met. I keep it at the SB size however even when heads up.
One minor problem starting the BBA in L1 is that the initial BBA poster is at an all-in disadvantage vs the rest of the table. Stack sizes are sufficiently changed after L1 so that it's considerably less of (or not) an issue.
Legend5555
Full House
Yes, in the extremely rare instance the person with the ante gets it all in on hand one and wins, the other person is left with 1bb instead of being eliminated.
A player with 1bb compared to having 0bb in the first hand of a tournament isn't much of a reason to nix an entire BBA level IMO
Agreed, except it's not just the first hand of L1. Any and all all-in hands between a BBA poster and a full-stack player. Also impacts bounty chips (if used).
Also noteworthy to mention that it's a non-existant issue if no antes are used, or if individually-posted antes are in play. Exclusively unique to BBA in L1 (and possibly L2). And easily addressed if introduced starting in L3.
Last edited:
Legend5555
Full House
Still dying on this hill I see.
Right, but after the very first hand someone will have a covering stack so I just don't think it's a thing. Chalk it up to that luck part of poker.
You're not getting it. After that first hand, the next player posting a BBA is in the exact same situation (all-in with full stack but unable to eliminate another full stack player). And it applies to every subsequent full stack player that posts the BBA.
Legend5555
Full House
Don't engage with him on this. He is extremely anti-BBA.
Ok, then first orbit of no BBA clears that up if you really really need to prevent someone from being left with 1bb. Casinos used to not have a BBA for the first level or two, and/or changed to a traditional ante at final 27, and/or changed to SB ante at final 4, and/or changed to no ante when heads up...........but it all just doesn't matter and now you see BBA throughout the entire tournament.
As are you, apparently.
Legend5555
Full House
I'm not dying on anything. BBA has already won outside of the home game scene.
ekricket
Royal Flush
And poker rooms will continue to close…
Legend5555
Full House
How is that correlated exactly?
ekricket
Royal Flush
Who knows. It just looks like whatever it is they are doing it’s not the right thing. What else has changed in the last five years, lol.
There was something called Covid going on.......
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
