Poker prize distribution

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?

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

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.

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

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

20/10 for sure.

Buckeye

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.