FULL TILT POKER BLOG

#645 – Engulfed by Biloxi #15 – Running a Tournament is Hard! – Part I

Posted by Editor | Filed under Uncategorized

[This two-part entry was written at two different times. This part was written on Tuesday, as I waited to play the final table of the HORSE. The second part was written on Thursday evening, while watching the second half of Day 2 of the Main Event. The WPT's own web site referred to Day 2 as "possibly the most grueling Day 2 of any tournament in World Poker Tour history".]

Tuesday portion -

What follows should not be construed as criticism of MGM Mirage, Beau Rivage, or the Southern Poker Championship. Well, actually, it should. In my limited experience here, along with input and insight from several players, I have noticed many flaws in the operation of the tournament, some of them pretty obvious.

But the larger point is not for me to complain. Certainly, I hope the tournament operators take these matters to heart. Even better, other tournaments can learn from Beau’s mistakes. My main point, though, is that RUNNING A TOURNAMENT IS HARD.

I’m not saying we as poker players should put up with shoddy tournaments. (In fact, I sense some players, based on turnout, are voting with their feet.) We should continue to criticize and agitate. But we should also recognize the difficulties tournament operators face and have the perspective to appreciate when they get it right, especially because it may not be possible to get it right all the time.

The is, to a small degree, another love note penned to Harrah’s and the WSOP folks. They still get some things wrong, but playing in other tournaments – operated by well-meaning and experienced staff – makes some things very clear: (1) They get a lot of things right at the WSOP; (2) Jeffrey Pollack and his staff have learned from many of their mistakes and have tried to fix them; and (3) The WSOP has proven responsive to players, so credit that to the Players Advisory Committee and the decision to create and listen to the PAC.

Yesterday, I played the $1,000 + $70 HORSE – I play the final table in less than 2 hours so I better type fast – and here are some of the things I noticed:

*I was seated at Table 69, Seat 2. In Seat 1, to my immediate right, was Allen Kessler. Allen and I both knew each other by reputation and had some common friends, but it was the first time we had an opportunity to talk and play together. Allen is part of that group of Smart Folks who have taken skills that might otherwise be wasted in academics, business, or government, and applied them to gambling. He is very smart, thinks through matters involving his business very carefully, and is not shy about expressing his opinions. Kessler gave me an earful about the tournament.

*Without a doubt, the tournament structure was bizarre. Instead of a certain number of hands of each game and/or levels including each game at equivalent stakes, they went in an entirely different direction. We played 25 minutes of each game and, keeping with breaks every 100 minutes, the limits/blinds/antes went up every FOUR games. So, for example, we played 25 minutes of Hold ‘em and Omaha EOB with 25-50 blinds, 50-100 limits. Then we played 25 minutes each of Razz and Stud with 5 antes, 15 bring-in, 50-100 limits. Following the first break, the played Stud EOB, but at limits much higher than we just played Razz or Stud: 25 antes (compared with 5), 50 bring in, and limits of 100-200. So the limit was doubled, the bringing more than tripled, and the ante quintupled. – all in the first round of Stud EOB.

*Allen insisted that I quote him on this in the blog. (He also asked what books I’ll send him for free. On the spot, I told him I’d send him both SUICIDE KING and THE STRATEGY GUIDE. I’ll allow that Kessler, like our mutual friend Richard Brodie, is much smarter than me. But I found a way to use practical stupidity to my advantage: as effusive as I was in my promises to send him the books, I arranged the conversation so he never gave me his address. Point Craig!) Says Allen of the structure: “Totally stupid way of doing it.” “I found four mistakes in the structure sheet. They’re fixing them on the computer.” He then noticed another mistake and chastised himself – I mean, he was seriously disappointed himself – for not noticing it before.

*Kessler pointed out how changing games based on time rather than number of hands favored Hold ‘em. “It’s essentially a hold ‘em tournament featuring other games rather than a HORSE event. You play 50% more hold ‘em hands, because hold ‘em is a much faster game.” To illustrate the point, we – well, mostly Allen – kept track of the number of hands played during the first round of each game.

Hold ‘em: 17 hands
Omaha EOB: 10 hands
Razz: 9 hands
Stud: 10 hands
Stud EOB: 8 hands

Popularity: 1% [?]

Be Sociable, Share!