What kind of structure will support the better player most? (1 Viewer)

[Pinball]

What kind of structure will support the better player most?
(Duration of the Tournament is the same)
In NL Holdem

More Chips – shorter Blind Levels or Less Chips – longer Blind Levels


In FL Stud / Razz / Stud Hi / Lo

More Chips – shorter Blind Levels or Less Chips – longer Blind Levels


In PL Omaha

More Chips – shorter Blind Levels or Less Chips – longer Blind Levels


In FL Omaha Hi Lo

More Chips – shorter Blind Levels or Less Chips – longer Blind Levels


FL Badugi (Triple Draw)

More Chips – shorter Blind Levels or Less Chips – longer Blind Levels

 

[Poker Zombie]

This has been discussed before, and I know some will disagree with me. I think that a well structured tournament rewards the "better player" based solely on the tournament length, and all other factors are mostly trivial in a vacuum. However, poor players can be penalized by those trivial factors.

If the poor player limps into every hand early in a tournament, their stack will be bled off rather effectively. Even perpetual limpers tighten up when the blinds escalate, but since poor players do not track their stack to BB ratio (or M-ratio). Less chips-longer blinds will punish the players whose leak is seeing too many hands.

Another common poor player leak is bluffing too often. Bluffers tend to slow down when their stack shrinks appreciably. With more chips/fast blinds the blind levels will catch the bluffer before they can steal their way back to the top of the leaderboard.

Players whose leak is over-playing their own hands (i.e. betting up a straight, but not seeing there are 4 cards to a flush on the board) will also suffer more with more chips/fast blinds, as they are often repping a hand better than they actually have without realizing it (essentially bluffing).

 

[Mr Tree]

Players whose leak is over-playing their own hands (i.e. betting up a straight, but not seeing there are 4 cards to a flush on the board) will also suffer more with more chips/fast blinds, as they are often repping a hand better than they actually have without realizing it (essentially bluffing).

I prefer to call it bluffing for value.

 

[Thomacetti]

Bad structure is main reason for shove fest... This EV- for the better players (in most cases)

 

[Pinball]

Bad structure is main reason for shove fest... This EV- for the better players (in most cases)

And what supports the better player more? more chips fast sturcture or less chips slow structure both tourneys have the same duration.

 

[DrStrange]

There are meta game considerations - "good for the better players" situations might not be healthy for the game. It is better to have a healthy game for a long time even if the best players do not maximize their winnings due to the structure of the game.

In the moment I think better players benefit from a high "M" as long as possible, so less chips + slow structure.

DrStrange

 

[Pinball]

There are meta game considerations - "good for the better players" situations might not be healthy for the game. It is better to have a healthy game for a long time even if the best players do not maximize their winnings due to the structure of the game.

In the moment I think better players benefit from a high "M" as long as possible, so less chips + slow structure.

DrStrange

personally i think also less chips - slow structure in holdem but what about other games?

 

[pltrgyst]

personally i think also less chips - slow structure in holdem but what about other games?

Definitely so in stud as well. I would think it would be the case in every game.

 

[BGinGA]

Agree with the consensus; the better structure behooves the better players, even with fewer starting chips...... in all games.

But better players will usually prevail with massive starting stacks in a poorly-structured game, too -- because they can do more with that stack than a lesser-skilled player, and better manage their resources as the tournament progresses and optimum strategy changes.

It is only when stack-v-blind sizes are shove-fest-small that the stronger players begin to lose advantage as luck begins to play a larger role.... but even then, the highly-skilled short-stack player will fare better than someone who doesn't understand or exercise optimum short-stack strategy.

 

[Poker Zombie]

It really goes back to M-Ratio, which is essentially the same either way. 2X/2 = X/1. The math is the same, psychological factors differ, but the "better" player can overcome and even capitalize on those psych factors.

I guess the real question is "how do you define a better player?"

 

[Pinball]

It really goes back to M-Ratio, which is essentially the same either way. 2X/2 = X/1. The math is the same, psychological factors differ, but the "better" player can overcome and even capitalize on those psych factors.

I guess the real question is "how do you define a better player?"

The player who knows the game better (read some books, watched some training videos ect) vs the player who just know the rules.

 

[Poker Zombie]

In cases of "better", The "best" will usually beat lessor players. A is the best, so A usually defeats B, who is slightly better than C, who rarely wins.

In poker, A (a poker enthusiast that has read many books) may usually defeat B (a mathematician and a very unemotional guy), but C (a psychologist) may be really good at getting tells off of A, allowing C to usually beat A, but since C cannot get reads off of B, B's better math skills hold the edge over C. Now who is the best?

 

[Pinball]

In cases of "better", The "best" will usually beat lessor players. A is the best, so A usually defeats B, who is slightly better than C, who rarely wins.

In poker, A (a poker enthusiast that has read many books) may usually defeat B (a mathematician and a very unemotional guy), but C (a psychologist) may be really good at getting tells off of A, allowing C to usually beat A, but since C cannot get reads off of B, B's better math skills hold the edge over C. Now who is the best?

Lets take the best from ABC (better player) vs. the worst of ABC

 

[Mental Nomad]

I also agree with the consensus, but via slightly different reasoning...

To me, the structure isn't supporting the better player. By definition, the better player adapts well to whatever structure in play.

The question, then, is what structure punishes the poorer players the most. This depends a little on what bad habits the poor players have, but certain structures will definitely accentuate certain bad habits, while others may compensate (slightly) for them.

Also, in general, any structures that provide options (such as rebuys and topoffs) will favor the better players, as well, because they can use them intelligently... while for poor players, more options are more opportunities to make mistakes.

 

[ChaosRock]

I'll be the dissenting voice...

I believe for a certain, and equal, tournament duration, the better player will have a bigger edge when the stacks start deeper and deeper... I find not so good players make their biggest mistakes when playing deep stacked... Imo that's valid for any NL or PL poker variant... It seems to me, logically, it would also be true for FL, although not as pronounced, but I haven't played nearly enough FL tournaments to comment...

Comparing two structures in which the total of 20BB on the table happens at a 5-hour mark but one starts at 100BB p/p and the other starts at 250BB p/p all we have is a steeper curve for the deeper structure converging with the shallower structure at 20BB total... So at any point in time, other than at 20BB total, the total BBs in play will be bigger for the deep stack structure, favoring the craftier player imo... Not too mention that because of the steeper downward slope the players have to adjust quicker, also favoring the better player...

The better player will also have an edge when stacks are medium size and also when they are short but I don't believe that edge is as significant as when stacks are huge...