Poker Forum
|
Over 1,247,000 Posts!
|
|
|
>
>
Poker prize distribution
|
|
|
Biren
|
04-16-2005, 06:11 AM
Post subject: Poker prize distribution
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27
|
|
Ok we play poker tournaments at a friends house all the time. The buy in is $5 and it's your good old No-Limit Texas Hold 'Em. Here is where the conflict sets in.
It's usually six people playing. So the pot is $30. And second place gets their money back and first place wins $25.
I spoke up against this and said that it is unfair. There are six people that you start off with. If fighting through the four of them, and I end up only winning my money back, then there was no point.
I said that we should raise the prizes to second places gets $10 and first place gets $20. First place still makes 4x the buy-in and second place doubles their buy in. I think that's a little more fair. Because second place should get more because of the effort that they have to put in to place second out of six people.
What do you all think? Which one is more fair and why?
How should the prices be if there were 7, 8, 10 people in?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
TenPercenter
|
04-16-2005, 05:00 PM
Post subject: Re: Poker prize distribution
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 16
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Biren
Ok we play poker tournaments at a friends house all the time. The buy in is $5 and it's your good old No-Limit Texas Hold 'Em. Here is where the conflict sets in.
It's usually six people playing. So the pot is $30. And second place gets their money back and first place wins $25.
I spoke up against this and said that it is unfair. There are six people that you start off with. If fighting through the four of them, and
I end up only winning my money back, then there was no point.
I said that we should raise the prizes to second places gets $10 and first place gets $20. First place still makes 4x the buy-in and second place doubles their buy in. I think that's a little more fair. Because second place should get more because of the effort that they have to put in to place second out of six people.
What do you all think? Which one is more fair and why?
How should the prices be if there were 7, 8, 10 people in?
|
Honestly? I dont think second place should have gotten anything. That's too small a group for two prizes. My rule of thumb is first place only until 9-10 entries, then a second place and a place paid for about every six more over ten.
Ten
|
TenPercenter
|
|
thepokerdude
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The Dude Abides
Posts: 170
|
|
i disagree ten, i think that second should get ten and first 20. if this were a casino or online game where everyone was a stranger, then yes, only first should win. but in my experience with my own home game, they can tend to be a grind, especially with six or seven people who all know each other, are used to each other's play, and only play once every two weeks when we all get together.
if only first place paid out, then the chances are you could go for six months and never win anything, and in a hard grind like a tournament among friends, that can really suck. i agree with you biren, that should be the payout, it gives more hope to the guys who keep getting third and fourth.
|
|
"But they were suited?!?! You idiot!!"
|
|
TenPercenter
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 16
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thepokerdude
i disagree ten, i think that second should get ten and first 20. if this were a casino or online game where everyone was a stranger, then yes, only first should win. but in my experience with my own home game, they can tend to be a grind, especially with six or seven people who all know each other, are used to each other's play, and only play once every two weeks when we all get together.
if only first place paid out, then the chances are you could go for six months and never win anything, and in a hard grind like a tournament among friends, that can really suck. i agree with you biren, that should be the payout, it gives more hope to the guys who keep getting third and fourth.
|
i see where you're coming from, and i could easily accept two places if that's what the group wants. if its a weekly game though, your chances are good to place often, if your a decent player
ten
|
TenPercenter
|
|
FyrFytr998
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Milford,Ct.
Posts: 1,412
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thepokerdude
i disagree ten, i think that second should get ten and first 20. if this were a casino or online game where everyone was a stranger, then yes, only first should win. but in my experience with my own home game, they can tend to be a grind, especially with six or seven people who all know each other, are used to each other's play, and only play once every two weeks when we all get together.
if only first place paid out, then the chances are you could go for six months and never win anything, and in a hard grind like a tournament among friends, that can really suck. i agree with you biren, that should be the payout, it gives more hope to the guys who keep getting third and fourth.
|
I agree. Because if there is a great player among the average. Who'll want to play that game? No one that's who. I know I wouldn't waste my money all the time if it were a pretty good certainty that it'd be one specific person always winning the games.
Don't get me wrong. Anyone can win at any time, but more than one prize keeps hope alive and the game interesting. A 20/10 split is the way to go
|
|
|
|
Buckeye
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 53
|
|
20/10 for sure.
Buckeye
|
|
|
|
Biren
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 27
|
|
Thanks for feedback, guys. Other players still don't get this concept, so I have to be extreme and refuse to play if they don't set up the prizes that way.
|
|
|
|
Latest Poker News
|
|
Bbickes
|
06-02-2012, 08:10 PM Merge Network 6.0 Looks to Retain Current Player Base
|
|
In an effort to perhaps keep players from moving to the new Revolution Network setup by the former Lock Poker, Merge Network has taken drastic steps to respond to their player base's requests to impro ...
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:37 AM.
|