Bitcointalk Poker Series format discussion - Let's keep them all in one place.

[Steamtyme]

This is just a landing page topic to discuss changes and preferences for the tournament series already running on SWC. I will Self-Mod this thread to keep the discussion relevant and between participants. This is separate from discussing specific tournaments and hands.

Hopefully doing it this way will allow us to gather all the ideas in one place and if we can come up with a consensus or majority whatever works best, then we can ask for changes. I would also like to suggest we make changes to a series before it starts and let it run it's course before requesting any other changes.

Bring it all. Seats at the table, Starting chips, Level duration. I thin k there has also been some debate about the overall tournament schedule and point system.

[1714739077]

1714739077

[1714739077]

1714739077

[1714739077]

1714739077

[1714739077]

1714739077

[figmentofmyass]

good idea. it seems like everyone and their grandma has a different plan for how the points system should work. i guess there are lots of game theory considerations.

i posted a link to this thread earlier, where i think a lot of important points are covered.

the #1 goal to keep in mind IMO:

The purpose of any league is to keep players coming back to improve their score.

with that in mind, these are the most common structures:

linear points: (n-r+1) where n = number of entrants and r = rank placed. so for a field of 18 players:

1st place = 18 points
18th place = 1 point

points = ITM: points are based on tournament cashes. this is very top-heavy. the top 16.67% cash in a 30-man tournament on SwC.

what we did: a hybrid take on linear points, where we flattened the payouts on both sides. the top players get less, but the bottom players get none.

i'm seeing people lobbying for both flatter payouts and more top-heavy ones, so i'm not sure we'll end up changing what seems like a reasonable compromise.

if we did implement something more top-heavy---like some of the curve/sqrt based systems, or linear points but only paying out the top x% of the field---we should consider rules that keep the series competitive (nods to the #1 goal stated above). one way some leagues do that is to require a minimum # of games played, with only your top x number of games counting towards points standings. that could help offset variance so people can still recover from a few bad runs.

the most common argument against flat structures (like linear points) is they can encourage points angling. i think it's debatable how much of an edge late registration or sitouts gives there. it's annoying but i dunno if it makes a big difference. one additional way this could be addressed is by awarding points for KOs to induce action. lol, so many angles to consider!

[efialtis]

This is just a landing page topic to discuss changes and preferences for the tournament series already running on SWC. I will Self-Mod this thread to keep the discussion relevant and between participants. This is separate from discussing specific tournaments and hands.

Hopefully doing it this way will allow us to gather all the ideas in one place and if we can come up with a consensus or majority whatever works best, then we can ask for changes. I would also like to suggest we make changes to a series before it starts and let it run it's course before requesting any other changes.

Bring it all. Seats at the table, Starting chips, Level duration. I thin k there has also been some debate about the overall tournament schedule and point system.

Thanks for creating this thread mate - great idea. You guys discuss the future point system etc. and I will obey. I hope everyone is cool with changes being made for the next series though.

[vycl87]

A useful topic created with good thinking. But first, we need to know that. If we can build a community of enough people here, can we make a change? What I want to say is that it's not just a topic that people talk about but has no conclusions.

[iv4n]

The purpose of any league is to keep players coming back to improve their score.

Following this logic I think you can make any point system you like, people will play and try as long as the prize is good!

maybe in the next series the structure should reward the top 3 players based on points , or maybe we should cancel the finale as well and credit the final prizes based on points

Well this sounds very interesting! I think we should add some chips for that, or to cut prizes for grand finale!?

There should be a grand finale, and there should be a prize for point leaders! Of course only one thing is a problem, money! We need to add more money, but cost of each tournament will not be ok with everyone, the same is with adding more chips to Efi (instead 200, it can be 400 or 500). SwC turns to be a great site for us, like a real sponsors of tournament they added chips, hat and from this series a ticket for big btc tournament! Can we find more sponsors?! And how!? If we can do that, then entry and fees can stay the same, and will not be a burden for existing and new players!

Two options for now, we can either lower prizes and spread them, or we can make these tournaments more expensive!

i'm seeing people lobbying for both flatter payouts and more top-heavy ones, so i'm not sure we'll end up changing what seems like a reasonable compromise.

Agree! We will not find a solution that will suit everyone, but as long as majority agrees we can make certain changes! There're good ideas and suggestions, I think only money is holding us back for now (or more players that will add more)! Anyway we have healthy discussions, whatever comes up from that will be good definitely!

[figmentofmyass]

i think Hhampuz might be onto something here:

Now my idea for an implementation would be perhaps one game per week over 2 months as that could theoretically mean less variance and more stability as I know some people can't/don't want to commit both their Saturday and Sunday to play poker, depending on your timezone (I know current timezone makes it harder for any americans to play) it's quite the commitment indeed.

after the current series ends, maybe we should transition to once per week. a sunday poker game maybe? people with less free time to commit are more likely to participate in the league that way.

i'm down to play twice a week myself, but i think we can see from april vs may turnouts that not everyone feels that way.

[Steamtyme]

I agree with the 1 tournament a week. For me it's due to the time they start noon. So I have a house full and 2 kiddos staring at Dad lol.

Not sure how big a deal it is to most but it could help some spread out their budget for playing as well.

[efialtis]

We can definitely discuss playing one game per weekend (Sunday ideally) over the course of two months - makes sense to me and will make my life organizing things easier, too, tbh. Sending out PWs etc. and being "there" each Saturday & Sunday evening/night is quite hard - especially for the people who'd like to spend time with me - surprisingly, there are a few, haha.

[Betwrong]

I agree with one-game-per-week format. I don't know if this format is the ideal one, but if we want to to attract more players to our series, we should at least try it for once.

Of course, the opinions of those who are not participating currently, but would like to join if some changes to the format were made, are the most valuable now, imo.

So, dear potential participants, if you have any suggestions regarding timing, ticket price, frequency etc., please, speak up!

[tyKiwanuka]

- We need to find a way to get rid of that 200 extra chips sending... I do not mean to get rid of the "extra prize pool" but about the hassle of sending those chips... If anyone can come up with an alternative... that would be greatly appreciated!!

I see 3 alternatives:

1) All players send their extra chips after the 8 tournaments have finished according to their number of participations. Problem: You will have players that forget or have gone awol and efialtis will have to run after that money.

2) All players send their chips upfront and get refunded for tournaments they didn't join. If someone joins only at tournament #3 f.e., he would have to send 6x200 = 1200 for remaining ones. Problem: Will turn off newbies, that want to try first and people that just join from time to time for whatever reason.

3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

[Trofo]

3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

This would by far the easiest solution for you guys, and at the same time very fair to all participants. If you guys have good contact at SwC ask them and see what they think about it, how much additional work it adds to them. Maybe they already have some script ready and it is a matter of just using it and configuring to take 200 chips.


I would prefer 1 tournament per week (on Sunday) format as well. I would like to be a part of every tournament but real life is getting more and more demanding....don't know how long I will be able to keep current tempo.

And the series can take as long as it is necessary, we could have it for 2 months to keep current number of tournaments. Or maybe as quarterly thing. One series takes 3 months (10 regular tournaments + big finale and a bit of rest, or casual game to have fun).

[arallmuus]

I would prefer 1 tournament per week (on Sunday) format as well. I would like to be a part of every tournament but real life is getting more and more demanding....don't know how long I will be able to keep current tempo.

And the series can take as long as it is necessary, we could have it for 2 months to keep current number of tournaments. Or maybe as quarterly thing. One series takes 3 months (10 regular tournaments + big finale and a bit of rest, or casual game to have fun).

One thing about dragging the tournament for a much longer period is that it will lose all the hype and tension compare with the current one. However I do agree the needs to make the tournament into one tournament per week due to some real life issue catching up

So instead of still having 8 regular game + 1 Grand Final, probably we could downsize it to 5 regular + 1 grand final which would take up to 6 weeks then we can take a rest for 2 - 4 weeks before proceeding the next one if there will be the next one However the downside with this is that with only 5 regular game, it would be hard for some player to get points

3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

Definitely this is the best option. We could just count the number of player manually in every regular tournament and then notify SWC about the extra 200 chips per player in the prizepool for the grandfinal


Also Posting this here as well for visibility

Im just wondering this, is it possible to add some sort of point for knocking out player in the 3rd series later ( Provided that we have the 3rd series ). So instead of trying to get into top ten to get points, some player could also be getting it after they knock someone out.

Something like half point or for each person knocked out (?)

Might trigger some big action from the start of the game I guess or perhaps putting up some point bounty on random person for more points, probably could make the game much more interesting. I am not sure if this is possible so yeah any other thoughts ??  

[tyKiwanuka]

Definitely this is the best option. We could just count the number of player manually in every regular tournament and then notify SWC about the extra 200 chips per player in the prizepool for the grandfinal

I do track the number of participants per tournament at the very bottom of the main sheet and one could also look at the worst placing in each tournament. The problem is, that SwC has to do some setting in their software, because when the entry fee is increased to 1,200 (including the 200 extra chips) and you have 10 players, the entry fees total 12,000 chips, but the actual prize pool for that tournament is only 10,000 for payout. So these 2,000 chips must not belong to prize pool and I don't know, if this is easily doable for SwC.

Adding these chips to Grand Final should be easy, because they sponsor it anyway and would just have to up the prize pool accordingly.

[arallmuus]

Definitely this is the best option. We could just count the number of player manually in every regular tournament and then notify SWC about the extra 200 chips per player in the prizepool for the grandfinal

I do track the number of participants per tournament at the very bottom of the main sheet and one could also look at the worst placing in each tournament. The problem is, that SwC has to do some setting in their software, because when the entry fee is increased to 1,200 (including the 200 extra chips) and you have 10 players, the entry fees total 12,000 chips, but the actual prize pool for that tournament is only 10,000 for payout. So these 2,000 chips must not belong to prize pool and I don't know, if this is easily doable for SwC.

Adding these chips to Grand Final should be easy, because they sponsor it anyway and would just have to up the prize pool accordingly.

Instead of making the entry fee 1200 chips, perhaps making the entry fee into 1000+200 chips? 1000 goes to the prize poll and 200 goes to swc which will be added to the grand final. Im not sure with how SWC works because I am new in SWC as well but in some other poker apps this could be done usually the buy in fees goes like $10 + $1 whereas $10 goes to prize pool and $1 goes to the website

[figmentofmyass]

1) All players send their extra chips after the 8 tournaments have finished according to their number of participations. Problem: You will have players that forget or have gone awol and efialtis will have to run after that money.

2) All players send their chips upfront and get refunded for tournaments they didn't join. If someone joins only at tournament #3 f.e., he would have to send 6x200 = 1200 for remaining ones. Problem: Will turn off newbies, that want to try first and people that just join from time to time for whatever reason.

3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

i'm sure it could technically be done, but it would create some legwork for SwC. i'm not sure they are willing or whether we should ask it of them. as it is, i dunno how much ROI they are getting from sponsoring our little league.

#1 is always gonna be a problem. nobody wants to chase after people for like 0.0006 BTC.

that leaves #2. the buy-ins themselves are already 0.001 BTC each. i don't think asking for 0.0016 BTC more for league entry up front seems like a big deal at all. it almost seems like an opportunity to round it up to 0.002 BTC. 400 chips is just a single buy-in at the low stakes 2/4 tables. requiring upfront payment for the entire series also creates incentive for players to keep coming back. it's also possible it could deter people who are on the fence from entering at all. anyone who isn't in on day 1 probably won't join later. always so many angles......

[Betwrong]

~
3) Entry fee gets increased to 1200 chips and SwC puts 200 of those aside and adds them to Grand Final automatically. Problem: Is SwC willing and able to do that on a technical level ?

I like this option the most, but there is one problem with it.

Remember that our tournaments are password protected. Suppose you wanted to register, what would be your next move? Even if you are willing to pay 1200 chips for the entry, you can't register without knowing the password, right? And if people who are willing to register will have to ask someone(via PM on this forum) for a password, we'll have the same hassle we want to get rid off.

Here's a solution I'd like to propose. Since we decided earlier to accept anyone, even a just registered newbie, this password thing doesn't have much sense.

So, what we can do is:

1. Get rid off passwords completely;

2. Keep everything as it was, but I will be doing what @efialtis was doing before: a player transfers 200 chips to my account on SwC; asks me for a password via PM on this forum; I check my Transfer history on SwC, and send him/her a password if the transfer was done. I don't mind doing this. In fact, I will be more than happy to make a modest contribution to the organizational process of our series.

I mean, since it's an extra hassle, we can do it in shifts. Thanks, @efialtis for doing it previously! The next two series are on me. (if there are no objections)

[figmentofmyass]

Here's a solution I'd like to propose. Since we decided earlier to accept anyone, even a just registered newbie, this password thing doesn't have much sense.

So, what we can do is:

1. Get rid off passwords completely;

it will become 1/2 populated by SwC tourney regs. maybe that's okay---on average, i would say our players are tougher to beat anyway. this is something to consider though, as it will definitely not feel as much like a "bitcointalk" tourney anymore. a password obviously doesn't keep out a determined outsider (and i don't care enough to stop them anyway) but having one (which forces you to come to bitcointalk to at least get the password) ensures that it's mostly people from our community who stick around.

2. Keep everything as it was, but I will be doing what @efialtis was doing before: a player transfers 200 chips to my account on SwC; asks me for a password via PM on this forum; I check my Transfer history on SwC, and send him/her a password if the transfer was done. I don't mind doing this. In fact, I will be more than happy to make a modest contribution to the organizational process of our series.

I mean, since it's an extra hassle, we can do it in shifts. Thanks, @efialtis for doing it previously! The next two series are on me. (if there are no objections)

i'm fine with that. i can also run it for a future series.

i actually really like the idea of an upfront "league entry fee" instead of per-game, and retaining 1000 chip buy-ins. it means we don't have to worry about dealing with such small amounts for dozens of people, dozens of PMs all the time. if SwC keeps putting up 0.05+ BTC for the championships (i don't know whether that will happen but fingers crossed) then that value more than pays for any missed games.

if we stop doing this "200 chips per game" thing in our heads, the league entry fee starts to make a lot of sense IMO.

[efialtis]

Thanks for all the input guys, highly appreciated! I will have a discussion with SwC shortly and see what we can do!

[Steamtyme]

Im just wondering this, is it possible to add some sort of point for knocking out player in the 3rd series later ( Provided that we have the 3rd series ). So instead of trying to get into top ten to get points, some player could also be getting it after they knock someone out.
Something like half point or for each person knocked out (?)
Might trigger some big action from the start of the game I guess or perhaps putting up some point bounty on random person for more points, probably could make the game much more interesting. I am not sure if this is possible so yeah any other thoughts ??  

I'm not really keen on mixing it into the series itself. I think it would make a cool tournament to run once a month itself. Bounty tournaments are fun and can get pretty wild, so I'd definitely join one for a good time. I think the idea behind a series and a championship lends itself to a points only for finishes format and should be kept that way.
In regards to fees and managing them I can go either way. We definitely should still keep this password protected, and forum member only. Anyone playing there with BTC could easily create an account in a matter of seconds if they are interested. Otherwise it's really just another tournament where I know a few extra people than usual. I play this series for the comradery  and to go over spots later on it would loose a bit of it's fun appeal if it were flooded with Regs. I'd be less inclined to record my plays or even talk at the tables.

I am also of the camp that we should make things as easy as possible on the SWC team, they have gone way above and beyond what one could expect. They legitimately make nothing on our tournaments and toss in huge extras just so we can have a good time.I'm sure they could make it easy and go with the standard format for a tournament[entry+Fee] 1000+200 at registration. In the end they just create the final tournament and add the total from the 200 collected to that prizepool. For me this isn't ideal, as I said I don't want to ask them for more than they do already.

Back to the league entry fee. This can be done a few different ways. If full payment upfront is done we can then before the Championship make refunds for games not played. This can either be the full 200 per game or something like 175/150 if people aren't all in agreement for a full refund/qame missed. This helps people not feel like they are just giving away money, it should also solve any issues of people wanting to join in for a one-off or after a few missed games. It can also be collected in 2 terms first half and second half.

Whoever collects the League fees then provides the passwords for all of the tournaments upon league registration.

@betwrong and @figmentofmyass - Good on you guys offering to handle and hold fees. I have no issues with either of them doing this.

I'm going to spend a little time this week looking into SWC's social media and see if there are places I can post to try and convert some of their regs. I would like to see us build our ranks and maybe bring some people back to the forum even if it's only to hang in what is fast becoming our active poker community. I might try working on a few others on the forum. I don't know them to well but am surprised they aren't participating. It may have been the 2 games a weekend thing.

[CCwatcher420]

I agree that we need to space out the tournies a bit. I think it would be great if we had one mid week tourney, and one sunday tourney. That way, the later half of the weekend is booked. Time zones would be an issue so we would need to tally who is where.

[1r0n1c]

I like playing 2 tournaments at the weekend, but I understand you when it´s too demanding - especially when timezones issues pop up.
However, when we decide to have 1 final table after 2 months I would like to increase the pricepool. Either we´re paying 1500 or 2000 instead of 1000, or what Ivan suggested, that
we create an additional Price pool for the guys with the most points (maybe 200 extra and places 1-3 are paid?!).
I know, the idea is having fun, spending a good time with people from this Forum, but it´s also a competition.

[figmentofmyass]

However, when we decide to have 1 final table after 2 months I would like to increase the pricepool. Either we´re paying 1500 or 2000 instead of 1000, or what Ivan suggested, that we create an additional Price pool for the guys with the most points (maybe 200 extra and places 1-3 are paid?!).
I know, the idea is having fun, spending a good time with people from this Forum, but it´s also a competition.

are you saying you wanna add an additional buy-in on top? so instead of 1000+200 per game as now, it would be 1000+200+200, where 200 goes to the championship prize pool and 200 goes towards a separate prize pool for the top 3 in league points?

i kinda like it. it adds some additional incentive to play every game. what does everyone else think?

[1r0n1c]

However, when we decide to have 1 final table after 2 months I would like to increase the pricepool. Either we´re paying 1500 or 2000 instead of 1000, or what Ivan suggested, that we create an additional Price pool for the guys with the most points (maybe 200 extra and places 1-3 are paid?!).
I know, the idea is having fun, spending a good time with people from this Forum, but it´s also a competition.

are you saying you wanna add an additional buy-in on top? so instead of 1000+200 per game as now, it would be 1000+200+200, where 200 goes to the championship prize pool and 200 goes towards a separate prize pool for the top 3 in league points?

i kinda like it. it adds some additional incentive to play every game. what does everyone else think?

exactly! I like the idea as well. It could have multiple effects when we pay 1000 + 200 + 200
1. People are more motivated to Play every game (to collect as many league Points as possible)
2. That lead´s to a higher Price pool on the final table
3. the top 3 in league Points are more appreciated for their good Play

What do you guys think about that?

[tyKiwanuka]

i kinda like it. it adds some additional incentive to play every game. what does everyone else think?

I think the Top9 in league points should get some prize. For example CCwatcher420/JTisCuban has 14 participations and is playing good poker throughout both series. Missed Grand Final in first series, but will probably qualify for it this time. If he isn't in the money there, he would have participated in every tournament there was and never has gotten anything back. This is kind of unfair (well, is Poker fair anyway ? ) imo and regular players (add maybe good to it) should get rewarded at some point.

It's the same with you, but you at least were able to win some BTC in small final.

If you split some additional prize pool for league points between 9 players, it will be quite few for each one of them then again though.....but maybe better than nothing

[arallmuus]

I think it would be great if we had one mid week tourney, and one sunday tourney. That way, the later half of the weekend is booked. Time zones would be an issue so we would need to tally who is where.

If some people have hard time catching up the game on both Saturday and Sunday then it might be harder for them to play on mid week. Life is getting back to normal now with no more quarantine in some country

I think the Top9 in league points should get some prize. For example CCwatcher420/JTisCuban has 14 participations and is playing good poker throughout both series. Missed Grand Final in first series, but will probably qualify for it this time. If he isn't in the money there, he would have participated in every tournament there was and never has gotten anything back. This is kind of unfair (well, is Poker fair anyway ? ) imo and regular players (add maybe good to it) should get rewarded at some point.

At some point I do know that this is a game and there will always be a winner or loser . Everyone cant win everything sadly  

Anyway, isnt there some runners up freeroll in the 1st series? Since there will be 3 places paid in the Grand Final, Perhaps the other 6 could be invited to play some runners up 0.01 guaranteed game? Probably sponsored by our 3 winners in the Grand Final (?)

Got invited by efialtis to a runners up game before eventhough I didnt make alot of points in the first series  

Hey together,

I can't wait to meet you all at the tables on Sunday for our 10 mBTC Runners-up Freeroll. Please do not share the password with anyone. Thank you! Smiley

I'm not really keen on mixing it into the series itself. I think it would make a cool tournament to run once a month itself. Bounty tournaments are fun and can get pretty wild, so I'd definitely join one for a good time. I think the idea behind a series and a championship lends itself to a points only for finishes format and should be kept that way.

Noted on this, I guess it would be hard to change the current one

[CCwatcher420]

I think the Top9 in league points should get some prize. For example CCwatcher420/JTisCuban has 14 participations and is playing good poker throughout both series. Missed Grand Final in first series, but will probably qualify for it this time. If he isn't in the money there, he would have participated in every tournament there was and never has gotten anything back. This is kind of unfair (well, is Poker fair anyway ? ) imo and regular players (add maybe good to it) should get rewarded at some point.

It's the same with you, but you at least were able to win some BTC in small final.

If you split some additional prize pool for league points between 9 players, it will be quite few for each one of them then again though.....but maybe better than nothing

Lol. Glad to see my consistency wasn't unnoticed. it isn't about prizes for me. I genuinely enjoy poker. I probably would have also made the final 10 on the first series had it not been for 2 bad beats. But it happens.

The site is soft enough where I have subsidized the last few tournament buyins with cash game winnings. I do enjoy playing on other sites as well. I mostly like the community aspect of this series.

I would enjoy an actual series with low buyin/high buyin tournies as well.

[figmentofmyass]

i kinda like it. it adds some additional incentive to play every game. what does everyone else think?

I think the Top9 in league points should get some prize. For example CCwatcher420/JTisCuban has 14 participations and is playing good poker throughout both series. Missed Grand Final in first series, but will probably qualify for it this time. If he isn't in the money there, he would have participated in every tournament there was and never has gotten anything back. This is kind of unfair (well, is Poker fair anyway ? ) imo and regular players (add maybe good to it) should get rewarded at some point.

It's the same with you, but you at least were able to win some BTC in small final.

i feel like the championship entry is already a flat payout---9 people winning a satellite ticket basically. the idea of this IMO would be to reward the top performers in the league. the championship game (or the runners up game, if there is one) in many ways is up to chance, whereas placing in the top 3 for the entire series says something more about skill/consistency.

i think if we're gonna add something it should be top heavy but let's hear some more opinions.

Anyway, isnt there some runners up freeroll in the 1st series?

SwC was nice enough to put that on for us. let's see if they'll do it again.

[Trofo]

This thread needs a bump, since new series will be starting soon and efialtis already said that he is starting to work on organization so I decided to once more sum up my thoughts on how we should move forward:
- We should make it one tournament per week, played on Sunday. I could be wrong but from what I have seen I have a feeling Sunday is better day for most of us. We are loosing players every week and that is probably due to heavy time involvement with the series as our lives gets more and more to normal. One tournament per week would help me to keep attending all the tournaments, and probably some other users as well
- Buy in should stay around current levels, If you get SwC to take that extra chips from the buy in, maybe we can make buy in 1500 chips, 1000 for the tournament, 250 for the grand table, 250 for the top 3 per points finished. This part is not really important for me personally but I saw some suggestions to that end
-5000 chips seems to work rather well for weekly tournaments so I would keep current chip/blinds structure
-10k chips for grand finale sounds reasonable

Our biggest problem going forward is attendance and we should do anything in our power to raise the number of participants. I think this is mostly the case of time involvement while current buy in structure should be fine for all interested. If you are on the brink on joining our little poker series please speak up and let us know what is stopping you.

[Steamtyme]

~snip~
i feel like the championship entry is already a flat payout---9 people winning a satellite ticket basically. the idea of this IMO would be to reward the top performers in the league. the championship game (or the runners up game, if there is one) in many ways is up to chance, whereas placing in the top 3 for the entire series says something more about skill/consistency.

i think if we're gonna add something it should be top heavy but let's hear some more opinions.

Anyway, isnt there some runners up freeroll in the 1st series?

SwC was nice enough to put that on for us. let's see if they'll do it again.

I don't think raising the entry to accommodate a special prize for top 3 will benefit the series overall. I think it will actually drive away more players than it will attract, based on the consistency and skill levels shown so far. I'd say most of the participants are fairly decent poker players with a few that have solid consistent documented finishes by the end of the series. This is also entering the 15-20$ buy-in that a lot of players won't want to consistently risk for a small tournament.
It would be different if it was just added to that tournaments prizepool, but again I think a lot of people will shy away from a larger buy-in.

Unfortunately efialitis did inform us that there was no runner-up tournament this time around.

Our biggest problem going forward is attendance and we should do anything in our power to raise the number of participants. I think this is mostly the case of time involvement while current buy in structure should be fine for all interested. If you are on the brink on joining our little poker series please speak up and let us know what is stopping you.

Agreed. I do think a lot of people drop out near the end if they are no longer in contention for the Championship. The 2 tournaments a weekend was definitely a draw back imo. If we carried on that way I likely wouldn't be able to participate fully, I've actually booked off some vacation the last 2 series just to fit in another couple tournaments lol.

Moving to 1 a weekend is already a good step in the right direction. I just try to mention the tournament to any and all that will listen. I haven't been on th eSWC cash tables lately but I was going to start poking some of their regs to come on out and join, I'm sure some of them already have an account here.

One thing I think might be nice especially considering we are currently rather small - Is a group discussion about the Championship game before the date is set. The time is not really movable to accommodate all of our players atm, but date seems easy enough to find one that works for all. I say this as I am lucky that I will be able to play this weekend, but if I were on my dayshifts I would be SOL. Nothing crazy but the option between 2 weekends might be nice.

[figmentofmyass]

We should make it one tournament per week, played on Sunday.

+1

If you get SwC to take that extra chips from the buy in, maybe we can make buy in 1500 chips, 1000 for the tournament, 250 for the grand table, 250 for the top 3 per points finished. This part is not really important for me personally but I saw some suggestions to that end

i'm open to this. @Steamtyme does raise some good points though.

we need to consider how to maximize participation. is an extra 300 chips per game (going towards league prizes) going to do that? it could keep players coming back to improve their standings, but it could also deter people entirely who don't feel they have a shot at top 3 to begin with.

i suppose we could consider a flatter structure for the top x in points? @tyKiwanuka suggested expanding it to the top 9. my gut reaction was "that's too flat" but in reality there was a lot of competition for 5th-9th place so it could keep things interesting. thoughts?

-5000 chips seems to work rather well for weekly tournaments so I would keep current chip/blinds structure
-10k chips for grand finale sounds reasonable

+1

[Betwrong]

If you get SwC to take that extra chips from the buy in, maybe we can make buy in 1500 chips, 1000 for the tournament, 250 for the grand table, 250 for the top 3 per points finished. This part is not really important for me personally but I saw some suggestions to that end

i'm open to this. @Steamtyme does raise some good points though.

we need to consider how to maximize participation. is an extra 300 chips per game (going towards league prizes) going to do that? it could keep players coming back to improve their standings, but it could also deter people entirely who don't feel they have a shot at top 3 to begin with.
~

I personally agree with 1000+250+250 structure, but it still remains a question, to me at least, whether new people are not joining because the prize pool looks too small to them, or because the entry price looks too big?

I think we can try to solve it in one shot in the #3 Series. On the one hand, we make it 1000+250+250, so those who want bigger prize pool will be happy. Yet on the other hand, if we make it one tournament per week, played on Sunday, as @Trofo suggested, people like me, who put limits on what they can potentially lose to gambling during a certain period of time, will be happy as well, because instead of risking 2,400 chips per week(1,200+1,200), they will be risking only 1,500 chips(per week).

[arallmuus]

I think we can try to solve it in one shot in the #3 Series. On the one hand, we make it 1000+250+250, so those who want bigger prize pool will be happy. Yet on the other hand, if we make it one tournament per week, played on Sunday, as @Trofo suggested, people like me, who put limits on what they can potentially lose to gambling during a certain period of time, will be happy as well, because instead of risking 2,400 chips per week(1,200+1,200), they will be risking only 1,500 chips(per week).

For regulars like us, it would be great to spend only 1500 per week. As FOMA has stated, this rise to a new issue that some people that dont play regularly or some new guy that only want to try it for one or two times. Instead of the regular 1200 chip , they would be risking 300 more for 1500

I personally dont mind with lower prizepool because Im not really aiming for the money. 1200 chips is good enough because in regular tournament we will have the some decent prizepool in accordance to number of people ( Provided if you are top 3 or perhaps 4 )

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

- We should make it one tournament per week, played on Sunday. I could be wrong but from what I have seen I have a feeling Sunday is better day for most of us. We are loosing players every week and that is probably due to heavy time involvement with the series as our lives gets more and more to normal. One tournament per week would help me to keep attending all the tournaments, and probably some other users as well

I have not problems.

- Buy in should stay around current levels, If you get SwC to take that extra chips from the buy in, maybe we can make buy in 1500 chips, 1000 for the tournament, 250 for the grand table, 250 for the top 3 per points finished. This part is not really important for me personally but I saw some suggestions to that end

I do not understand the bold part. 250 for the final tournament and what is this top 3 per point things?

-5000 chips seems to work rather well for weekly tournaments so I would keep current chip/blinds structure
-10k chips for grand finale sounds reasonable

Agree on both, although I will need to take the test of playing with 10k chips yet 🤪

What about late registration? Do we really need it?

[Steamtyme]

What about late registration? Do we really need it?

I think we have done away with it completely, iirc. Maybe we left in a 5-10 minute late reg that wouldn't really make a difference overall.

I've been giving the prizepool a lot of thought as that seems to be where people think we are weak. What if we allowed 1 re-buy within the first 45 minutes or something like that.  This way if someone is inclined they can buy back in off  bad beat or just because they bust out and want more. It's not much but the prizepool will continue to grow only when we get more people involved at ~the same buy-in. I personally think the increases will just turn this into more of a niche game, and i could be wrong.
I have been trying to think of neat ideas that could really be more luck based than skill based to encourage participation, without increasing buy-ins. What if we created a "High Hand" or something similar for each tournament as a side prize say 175 goes to the Championship pool and 25 goes to each tournaments "High Hand" pool. It takes a bit away from the top performers in the end but the more participants we draw in the larger the prizepools will be.

[tyKiwanuka]

I have been trying to think of neat ideas that could really be more luck based than skill based to encourage participation, without increasing buy-ins. What if we created a "High Hand" or something similar for each tournament as a side prize say 175 goes to the Championship pool and 25 goes to each tournaments "High Hand" pool. It takes a bit away from the top performers in the end but the more participants we draw in the larger the prizepools will be.

I have thought about such ideas as well. Mainly about incentives to keep the weaker and/or out-of-contention players interested and probably get new (regular) players. The best idea I could come up with, was some kind of lottery for players ranked outside of Top9 after 8 tournaments. Each player who has participated in at least 6/8 tournaments is eligible and will get "tickets" to the lottery based on his number of participations and the points he accumulated:



10 tickets per participation and one ticket per point:

I would get 60+24 = 84 tickets (ticket numbers 1-84)
SyGambler 60+23 = 83 tickets (ticket numbers 85-167)
Trofo 80+19 = 99 tickets (ticket numbers 168-......
cygan wouldn't be eligible, because only 5/8 played
jayce 60+1 = 61 tickets
etc.

Then you would have XXX tickets and the most trusted user, which is probably Hhampuz, would pick the winners with some random number generator. Each user can only have one winning ticket and you have like 3 prizes.

If you put 100 chips aside from each player for every tournament in series #2, you would have had a 14500 chips prize pool for this lottery.

The problem is........it creates additional hassle with collecting these funds, so probably not an option.

[figmentofmyass]

If you put 100 chips aside from each player for every tournament in series #2, you would have had a 14500 chips prize pool for this lottery.

The problem is........it creates additional hassle with collecting these funds, so probably not an option.

that's one reason why upfront league entry would be nice. everything gets sorted out and paid for beforehand (on a series basis rather than per game basis) except for the direct buy-ins themselves.

the problem of course is that 250+250 for league/championship prizes = 4000 chips up front, which may deter some people.

[Globb0]

I said my bit before.

I think everyone should get a point for entering any tournament match. So even if you came last 8 times you will have more points than someone who lost 2/2 of their games.

We aren't affecting the top end of your games. As seen its the usual faces in the top few slots, this is adoption at the other end of the scale.

Also I think a losers tournament was nice for something for the non pros to look forward to.

[figmentofmyass]

we're at least set on keeping 5000 chip starting stacks and the same blind structure, right?

any other thoughts on an additional buy-in to fund direct league prizes (ie top x players in points get BTC prizes)?

or about upfront league entry vs per game entry? it would be way less headache to collect fees if it were all done upfront.

I think everyone should get a point for entering any tournament match. So even if you came last 8 times you will have more points than someone who lost 2/2 of their games.

We aren't affecting the top end of your games. As seen its the usual faces in the top few slots, this is adoption at the other end of the scale.

so basically this?

linear points: (n-r+1) where n = number of entrants and r = rank placed. so for a field of 18 players:

1st place = 18 points
18th place = 1 point

the problem is it devalues the top ranks. the bigger the field is, the less share of points the winners get. in a really big field there is basically no difference between a #1 and #10 finish. i think it would be fine if we just had ~18 man tournaments, but with larger fields it flattens things quite a lot.

Also I think a losers tournament was nice for something for the non pros to look forward to.

i think so too. if we coordinate with SwC beforehand they might be willing to throw us a bone. if not, should we try to fund it ourselves? 500 chips x 20 players = the 0.01 BTC prize pool we had for the first runners up game.

[Globb0]

I don't think it has to be linear.

Keep your top places valuable. Below a certain point just give 1 point to the rest.

Might also generate some action mid table, because people might have to play to get safe.

[Trofo]

I don't think it has to be linear.

Keep your top places valuable. Below a certain point just give 1 point to the rest.

Might also generate some action mid table, because people might have to play to get safe.

So basically you are proposing to avoid 1 point for participation. That could work, at least I don't see a big downside for that proposal. Maybe we could give 10 points for first place as it is now. That way final table gets rewarded, 9th place gets 2 points if my math is correct and all other players get one point.

I would also like to have runners up tournament, I just don't know where to get money for it. I will be ok if do it like regular buy in but it would be much better if we manage to get some sponsor.

[Steamtyme]

I have thought about such ideas as well. Mainly about incentives to keep the weaker and/or out-of-contention players interested and probably get new (regular) players. The best idea I could come up with, was some kind of lottery for players ranked outside of Top9 after 8 tournaments. Each player who has participated in at least 6/8 tournaments is eligible and will get "tickets" to the lottery based on his number of participations and the points he accumulated:
~snip~
The problem is........it creates additional hassle with collecting these funds, so probably not an option.

Something like this could work as a random incentive for people to keep playing. Funding it and collecting isn't much harder than the current system. It would be nice to hear if people are opposed to up front entry/league fees or not.

we're at least set on keeping 5000 chip starting stacks and the same blind structure, right?
any other thoughts on an additional buy-in to fund direct league prizes (ie top x players in points get BTC prizes)?
or about upfront league entry vs per game entry? it would be way less headache to collect fees if it were all done upfront.
~snip~

i think so too. if we coordinate with SwC beforehand they might be willing to throw us a bone. if not, should we try to fund it ourselves? 500 chips x 20 players = the 0.01 BTC prize pool we had for the first runners up game.

Yes I like the 5000 chip starting stack. Blinds structure and speed seem fine for the games overall.

The more thought I give this I think the best way to make this inclusive would be to fund a runner-up tournament for the rest of the field. We could make it 1300 with the extra 100 going to the runner-up prizepool. Say everyone who plays in at least 1/2 of the qualifiers gets auto-entry. The prizepool won't be huge but it wouldn't be nothing and could provide incentive to everyone. I like the idea of keeping any extra we get from SWC directed towards the championship; unless they offer obviously.

I understand not giving everyone a point for games played. It's not so bad if you are finishing in the top 5 or so, but it really hurts people playing the bubble who hold out for that 1 point. @Globbo if we always funded a mini-championship do you feel that would still be incentive enough if there were no points outside of the top 10?
I played the nightly seal battle on SWC last night. Took a shot and invited the table to join got no takers but Riley Reid invited me to their "fansonly"  Made me chuckle. I don't know why Regs seem opposed to taking part but I did see Bitmutiny at the tables.

[arallmuus]

I would also like to have runners up tournament, I just don't know where to get money for it. I will be ok if do it like regular buy in but it would be much better if we manage to get some sponsor.

I would be fine with buy in but for some people that wouldnt be any different from the regular tournament and might shut them off. Plus it would be hard to get SWC to sponsor this ( or someone to sponsor this but is unlikely to happen )

The more thought I give this I think the best way to make this inclusive would be to fund a runner-up tournament for the rest of the field. We could make it 1300 with the extra 100 going to the runner-up prizepool.

Sounds good, extra 100 chips wont hurt especially when we have break this down to once a week instead of twice


Just confirming this once again, is it has been confirmed that there will only be 1 instead of 2 regular tournament per week for the 3rd series? Or are we still in discussion stage for that matter

[figmentofmyass]

I have thought about such ideas as well. Mainly about incentives to keep the weaker and/or out-of-contention players interested and probably get new (regular) players. The best idea I could come up with, was some kind of lottery for players ranked outside of Top9 after 8 tournaments. Each player who has participated in at least 6/8 tournaments is eligible and will get "tickets" to the lottery based on his number of participations and the points he accumulated:
~snip~
The problem is........it creates additional hassle with collecting these funds, so probably not an option.

Something like this could work as a random incentive for people to keep playing. Funding it and collecting isn't much harder than the current system. It would be nice to hear if people are opposed to up front entry/league fees or not.

+1. do it up front and it's not an issue. i'm just worried the people who might only play ~2-4 games won't play at all if we do it up front.

i like the idea of a random incentive, something to play towards even if you're not in contention, kinda like a bad beat jackpot or something.

The more thought I give this I think the best way to make this inclusive would be to fund a runner-up tournament for the rest of the field. We could make it 1300 with the extra 100 going to the runner-up prizepool. Say everyone who plays in at least 1/2 of the qualifiers gets auto-entry. The prizepool won't be huge but it wouldn't be nothing and could provide incentive to everyone. I like the idea of keeping any extra we get from SWC directed towards the championship; unless they offer obviously.

i'm on board with this. it would probably net a ~0.015+ BTC prize pool.

I understand not giving everyone a point for games played. It's not so bad if you are finishing in the top 5 or so, but it really hurts people playing the bubble who hold out for that 1 point.

it's not a big deal for me if we weight the top places. we just have to do it right.

the one positive thing about a system like that is it probably reduces the "points bubble" effect, when everyone gets all nitty around places 11-12.

Took a shot and invited the table to join got no takers but Riley Reid invited me to their "fansonly"   Made me chuckle. I don't know why Regs seem opposed to taking part but I did see Bitmutiny at the tables.

they're too cool for bitcointalk.

[Trofo]

Don't know if you guys seen it but Steve has been a gentlemen and invited all of us to very nice tournament on Sportsbet. It is this Sunday evening 2 hours later then our usual games. 2 mBTC buy in and 1 BTC in prizes + Watford FC jersey for basically all registered players if I got it correct. That is an offer I can't pass by and probably most of you as well. I propose to give efi some more time to arrange everything with SwC and start our series next week so we can give our best on this one this week. Linking par of the original post below, and hope to see all our regulars.

Hi Guys,
Also, a surprise for you guys only here on BTC Talk forum.. we have a separate private poker tournament being run Sunday afternoon and the Marketing team reached out to me and asked if you guys would be interested in joining and playing..
I said 'sure they will'!!  A massive prize pool on offer too.. 1 BTC prize pool!

For existing players, you get the bonus of not having to create a new sportsbet.io account.
Check out this link for more details and the password >> https://www.whatbitcoindid.com/sportsbet

A big big weekend ahead and good luck!

regards,

Steve.
Sportsbet.io

[figmentofmyass]

Don't know if you guys seen it but Steve has been a gentlemen and invited all of us to very nice tournament on Sportsbet. It is this Sunday evening 2 hours later then our usual games. 2 mBTC buy in and 1 BTC in prizes + Watford FC jersey for basically all registered players if I got it correct. That is an offer I can't pass by and probably most of you as well.

i'll be there for sure. i'm anticipating a huge overlay, maybe 0.8 BTC or more, considering the weekly freeroll only draws 200 runners. i can't really take delivery on a jersey (i'm in the states, shhh!) but oh well. the prize pool is fat enough on its own.

I propose to give efi some more time to arrange everything with SwC and start our series next week so we can give our best on this one this week.

there's no way anything will happen with the series by this weekend anyway---next weekend at the earliest.

i hope we can hammer out some of these league/format decisions in the next few days so we're all set for the 21st.

[Betwrong]

Don't know if you guys seen it but Steve has been a gentlemen and invited all of us to very nice tournament on Sportsbet. It is this Sunday evening 2 hours later then our usual games. 2 mBTC buy in and 1 BTC in prizes + Watford FC jersey for basically all registered players if I got it correct. That is an offer I can't pass by and probably most of you as well.

i'll be there for sure. i'm anticipating a huge overlay, maybe 0.8 BTC or more, considering the weekly freeroll only draws 200 runners. i can't really take delivery on a jersey (i'm in the states, shhh!) but oh well. the prize pool is fat enough on its own.

There are 12 entrants already currently, and I expect something in this range, 19-27 players, when the tournament will start(there is no late registration there). The prize structure for this range is as following:



It's very tempting to take part, and maybe I will(my balance on Sportsbet is several times higher than the buy-in, 2k chips), but normally I don't risk almost $20 at once because it is far greater than what I can afford to lose to gambling in one day. Well, maybe once in a year I can make an exception, we'll see.


As for the format of our series, I will accept any, just to play with you guys once again. To me, our series is not about money. I was out on the 4th place in the latest Grand Finale(with 3 places paid), and I was happy. I mean, it was unexpected, to tell the truth, I should have been frustrated, but I wasn't. That's a fact. I told my wife that the 4th place among 9 finalists, all of whom were good players, was a good achievement. And she believed me because she saw how happy I was.

[Trofo]

i'll be there for sure. i'm anticipating a huge overlay, maybe 0.8 BTC or more, considering the weekly freeroll only draws 200 runners. i can't really take delivery on a jersey (i'm in the states, shhh!) but oh well. the prize pool is fat enough on its own.

There are 12 entrants already currently, and I expect something in this range, 19-27 players, when the tournament will start(there is no late registration there). The prize structure for this range is as following:

I am expecting much more players, this is on done on Sportsbet and they have a lot of high rollers there, 2 mBTC is nothing for most of them. After all the prize is big and for that 20$ you get a free Watford FC shirt which costs around 100$ I guess. Of course if you don't mind giving an address and phone number.

Last time they had this tournament it was a freeroll and there was 500 participants.

Anyway, I'll take my shot at the prize and collect my free jersey at least.

[tyKiwanuka]

I am expecting much more players, this is on done on Sportsbet and they have a lot of high rollers there, 2 mBTC is nothing for most of them. After all the prize is big and for that 20$ you get a free Watford FC shirt which costs around 100$ I guess. Of course if you don't mind giving an address and phone number.

Last time they had this tournament it was a freeroll and there was 500 participants.

Anyway, I'll take my shot at the prize and collect my free jersey at least.

I too think, that it will be way more players, hundreds maybe.

Are you sure that this jersey is like a real on-field Watford jersey ? I can't imagine that tbh They just say "shirt" and I think it's just some basic T-shirt with some Watford logo.


For our poker series Sportsbet would be the better place to play I think in terms of some sponsoring and also attracting new/more players. They are very generous with all their promotions etc. and they have quite a huge customer base and could promote us in their BTT thread etc. But their poker software is just very annoying and I don't enjoy playing there at all unfortunately.

[efialtis]

Okay guys, sorry for me being "quiet" - I have now read through all the posts and I appreciate all the thoughts you are putting into this - the only downside here... There is no real "consensus" as to how the new serious should look like.

@tyKiwanuka I dont think our prizes are bad tbh and I had talks with sportsbet, they weren't too interested plus their software sucks big time indeed...

Some quick thoughts here:

- I also think/thought one tournament per week may be a nicer option BUT... would 4 tournaments per series be ideal? Probably not... Would it be ideal to have a series running over 2 months to make it 8 tournaments? Probably not... Another thing - with only 4 tournaments per series and current buy-in structure, well, I am not sure how happy SwC will be about sponsoring 0.05 BTC for the Grand Final

- Don't worry about runners-up tournament - there will be one next time, I will take care of that

- Do you think we really need to adapt the current points/leaderboard structure?

- I have thought about it and I really didn't come up with a solution regarding those extra chips BUT... I will just keep collecting the chips, no problem. All regulars will receive passwords in advance

@tyKiwanuka I LOVE that lottery idea and since I just stated I will keep collecting the extra chips, I don't mind collecting these funds. Question: Would you guys be okay with paying 300 extra chips and take aside 100 for the lottery or would you prefer deducting 100 chips from the Grand Final prize pool?

[Globb0]

I had talks with sportsbet, they weren't too interested plus their software sucks big time indeed...

Also couldn't join this from the uk. Redirects to a no poker version. I don't know what other countries are affected.

[Trofo]

@tyKiwanuka I dont think our prizes are bad tbh and I had talks with sportsbet, they weren't too interested plus their software sucks big time indeed...

Some quick thoughts here:

- I also think/thought one tournament per week may be a nicer option BUT... would 4 tournaments per series be ideal? Probably not... Would it be ideal to have a series running over 2 months to make it 8 tournaments? Probably not... Another thing - with only 4 tournaments per series and current buy-in structure, well, I am not sure how happy SwC will be about sponsoring 0.05 BTC for the Grand Final

- Don't worry about runners-up tournament - there will be one next time, I will take care of that

- Do you think we really need to adapt the current points/leaderboard structure?

- I have thought about it and I really didn't come up with a solution regarding those extra chips BUT... I will just keep collecting the chips, no problem. All regulars will receive passwords in advance

@tyKiwanuka I LOVE that lottery idea and since I just stated I will keep collecting the extra chips, I don't mind collecting these funds. Question: Would you guys be okay with paying 300 extra chips and take aside 100 for the lottery or would you prefer deducting 100 chips from the Grand Final prize pool?

SwC definitely has much better poker client than Sportsbet, especially if you take into account Sportsbet availability from some countries.

Definitely one tournament per week, more than that and I feel a lot of us would be unable to attend.

You don't have to limit series with time (1 month or 2). I personally don't care how long the series will run. Longer it runs we will have better prizes. I would talk with SwC and ask them to offer some sponsorship depending on length of the series. For me minimum would be maybe 4 tournaments, less than that really doesn't make sense and maximum would be maybe 10 tournaments. This would stretch our series a lot but if we get a nice extra bonus for the final table (and runners up table) I would be more than ok with it.

Points/leaderboard structure is OK for me as it is, but I understand the appeal of participation point as well. If that one extra point for participation means we will have few more players I would adapt it without second thoughts. First place gets fixed amount of points (10 or max 15) and then after place 10 you just award a single point to all that participated. Bonus from this point structure is that weakly tournaments would probably have bigger participation and consequently bigger rewards.

[Steamtyme]

In regards to the series structure. What if we went to 6 or 7 qualifiers. I personally don't mind if the series runs over the course of 2 months but could understand if others feel it's stretched out to long.

I'm good with the lottery. If we know that there will be a runners up tournament how big does this need to be. I always just think of keeping entry low. Is 1250 chips enough with 50 going to the lottery?

Either way let me know and I'll be there.

[tyKiwanuka]

@tyKiwanuka I dont think our prizes are bad tbh

Hehe, not at all, don't get me wrong. SwC has been very generous and you did a fantastic job organizing all this sponsoring. I am happy with the way the series is all in all, but the trend shows some decline in participants and how do you get more people to join and stay around ? Money Money always works.

But there is the "Quadratur des Kreises", where you need to make everyone happy with low entry fees - low entry fees to keep attracting new players. And then the winners also want to win more than their entry fee^^ So with the "fixed" sponsoring we get from SwC, we would need to up the fees we pay and I am fine with that.

I think this series works with a minimum of 18 regular players, but anything lower than that probably not longterm. And then again, the series doesn't work with like 100 regular participants imo unless you make big changes (to internal point structure mainly). So there needs to be some equilibrium.

- Don't worry about runners-up tournament - there will be one next time, I will take care of that

Good news. Here needs to be some rule then as well, like minimum of 6/8 tournaments played or whatever.


My proposal

- Entry fee: 1300
- 100 chips go to Grand Final
- 200 chips go to lottery
- there will be a small final (sponsored by SwC ?) for all participants that joined minimum 6/8 tournaments
- every participant is eligible for lottery, tickets are based on # of participations and points accumulated

For the series #2, this would transfer to:

- 14,500 chips additional prize money for Grand Final
- eligible for small final: tyKiwanuka, SyGambler, Improved, Trofo, BitcoinGirlClub, morvillz7z, jayce (too few, but should get better with new structure then)
- 29,000 chips for the lottery and the following number of tickets per user:

- per every 10k chips, one prize is created for the lottery, so 29k chips = 3 prizes á 9666 chips, only one prize per user max.
- the overall prize money for Grand Final would be a bit lower then, but these players can still get prize from lottery

[figmentofmyass]

@tyKiwanuka I dont think our prizes are bad tbh and I had talks with sportsbet, they weren't too interested plus their software sucks big time indeed...

+1, it's just awful. i hope for their sake they have plans to revamp it or find a new software provider. i'm sure it's part of the reason their poker room traffic is so low.

Would it be ideal to have a series running over 2 months to make it 8 tournaments? Probably not...

i actually thought this is what we were doing---a weekly game + finale in 2 months. that's cool with me. 4 games is definitely too short.

i'm also fine with 2 games per week but i know some people can't free up that much time. therein lies the problem.

- Don't worry about runners-up tournament - there will be one next time, I will take care of that

great news!

- Do you think we really need to adapt the current points/leaderboard structure?

not a big issue, but i can understand the desire to smooth out variance a bit and award for points.

@tyKiwanuka I LOVE that lottery idea and since I just stated I will keep collecting the extra chips, I don't mind collecting these funds. Question: Would you guys be okay with paying 300 extra chips and take aside 100 for the lottery or would you prefer deducting 100 chips from the Grand Final prize pool?

i prefer paying the extra chips.

- eligible for small final: tyKiwanuka, SyGambler, Improved, Trofo, BitcoinGirlClub, morvillz7z, jayce (too few, but should get better with new structure

i think everyone who meets the minimum requirements should be eligible. it would be a nice consolation for those who don't cash in the final.

[iv4n]

I don't think we should touch those 200 chips per tournament for grand prize. Lottery sounds like a good idea, but maybe it would be better to add more chips for that? Another 100 or 200 chips?!
8 tournaments in one month or two months is something to think about? Maybe to find some middle and play 10-12 tournaments in 2 months? Or it sounds like a stupid suggestion?

First week without our tournament, I can say I miss it already! I played all tournaments, and I will try to play all future ones, with any kind of structure. As a player I think we have a great tournament, without re-buys, add-ons, for me that's a true poker! We don't even need that late registration, who sits on time will play!

I hope we will play next weekend!

[figmentofmyass]

I don't think we should touch those 200 chips per tournament for grand prize. Lottery sounds like a good idea, but maybe it would be better to add more chips for that? Another 100 or 200 chips?!

+1, i don't wanna take away from the championship prize pool. that should still be the #1 incentive. i'm okay with adding an additional buy-in of 100 or 200 chips. so 1300-1400 chips total per game.

Also couldn't join this from the uk. Redirects to a no poker version. I don't know what other countries are affected.

VPN from germany seems to consistently work, although i am slightly paranoid about having to withdraw larger amounts without KYC.

per every 10k chips, one prize is created for the lottery, so 29k chips = 3 prizes á 9666 chips, only one prize per user max.

aiming for 3 prizes is probably a good structure. at first i was thinking flatter maybe (more prizes) but nearly paying for all the series buy-ins seems like a good lottery prize.

how does everyone feel about 1000 chips regular buy-in, 200 chips towards the championship, and 200 chips towards the lottery? = 1400 chips total per game.

[Betwrong]

~

per every 10k chips, one prize is created for the lottery, so 29k chips = 3 prizes á 9666 chips, only one prize per user max.

aiming for 3 prizes is probably a good structure. at first i was thinking flatter maybe (more prizes) but nearly paying for all the series buy-ins seems like a good lottery prize.

how does everyone feel about 1000 chips regular buy-in, 200 chips towards the championship, and 200 chips towards the lottery? = 1400 chips total per game.

Same as @Steamtyme, I always think of keeping entry as low as possible. But since we'll have one game per week instead of two, it means we'll pay 1400 chips per week instead of 2400(1200+1200), so i'm totally okay with that.

I agree with @iv4n and @FOMA that we shouldn't deduct anything from those 200 chips going to the prize pool of the Grand Finale.

Regarding the lottery, while thinking it's a great idea, and that @tyKiwanuka proposed a perfect structure for the tickets distribution, I suggest you guys to consider making it all less luck based. What if the money collected for the lottery would go to the runners-up tournament prize pool instead?

[Trofo]

Regarding the lottery, while thinking it's a great idea, and that @tyKiwanuka proposed a perfect structure for the tickets distribution, I suggest you guys to consider making it all less luck based. What if the money collected for the lottery would go to the runners-up tournament prize pool instead?

If you want to make it less luck based then we should play a big league of 20 tournaments and award first x places and that is it. That way quality would show itself on a large amount of tournaments and we would minimize the luck component.

I prefer the structure we have now, poker is in itself a nice balance of luck and quality and our series in current format captures it perfectly. Lottery is something extra to give a chance to regulars who don't have the results to get some extra money.

Anyway, my only real deal breaker would be if play more than one tournament per week or if we change the start of the tournament to something in the middle of night for me. All other stuff like amount of buy in or points structure I can live with and will participate in probably all the tournaments no matter what gets implemented in the end.

[tyKiwanuka]

What if the money collected for the lottery would go to the runners-up tournament prize pool instead?

Then the difference between Grand and small Final isn't that big anymore, which it should be though imo. And upping the prize pool for small final won't help the weaker players - they have no incentive to participate regularly in the tournaments, because they see no way of getting any money in return ever.

A lottery gives them the incentive to participate and even if they don't finish in the points and thus have no shot at the Grand Final, they will get tickets for the lottery with each participation. (And a spot for small final)

You need to have a good foundation for such a series, i.e. regular players. The players that will leave, are the ones that only ever contribute to the pot, but never (are able to) take anything out of it. You have to make sure, that these players have an incentive to keep playing. A lottery (maybe) does that.

[iv4n]

If you want to make it less luck based then we should play a big league of 20 tournaments and award first x places and that is it. That way quality would show itself on a large amount of tournaments and we would minimize the luck component.

I like how that sounds, I would like to play entire season with you people, for six months, tournament every week!

Many good suggestions, but someone has to collect money, to update spreadsheet... to talk with SwC, with players... I would add 100 chips (or more) for the jar! Is it how you say it in English? Someone to be paid for this work, to promote tournament, to do everything related with tournament..
For good organization we need money, and we need someone to work for that entire time! Efi and Ty did a great job for free, at least free entry for them would be a good thing.

I have a feeling that either we will make something big here, or we will just abandon all this!

[arallmuus]

- I also think/thought one tournament per week may be a nicer option BUT... would 4 tournaments per series be ideal? Probably not... Would it be ideal to have a series running over 2 months to make it 8 tournaments? Probably not... Another thing - with only 4 tournaments per series and current buy-in structure, well, I am not sure how happy SwC will be about sponsoring 0.05 BTC for the Grand Final

How about if we make it 6 tournament + 1 Grand Final for each series ? as both 4 or 8 tournaments might have their own downside so 6 might do the trick

eligible for small final: tyKiwanuka, SyGambler, Improved, Trofo, BitcoinGirlClub, morvillz7z, jayce (too few, but should get better with new structure then)

If the number for the small final participant is too low, then we could just add another 6 player that didnt get anything from the Grand Final instead? Everyone that make it to the Grand Final and lose could be given their second chance on the small final .

20 tournaments and award first x places and that is it. That way quality would show itself on a large amount of tournaments and we would minimize the luck component.

I like how that sounds, I would like to play entire season with you people, for six months, tournament every week!

This would be hard to do because anyone needs to keep on playing each week to get points, some people might have hard time joining each week due to real life issue

Also this would discourage alot of player to play at some point. Lets say the point difference on leaderboard between #1 until #5 isnt that big and Five of them still stand a chance to top the leaderboard

While the rest of the player might have huge gap in point difference, at some point all those guy might feel discourage to join the next one because they dont stand a chance anymore

We might see less than 8 players after 4 months of running it because all others wont really get to the top spot anymore even if they keep winning the tournament

Are you sure that this jersey is like a real on-field Watford jersey ? I can't imagine that tbh They just say "shirt" and I think it's just some basic T-shirt with some Watford logo.

  But the 1 btc prizepool is still worth it with only 2 mbtc buy in

[Trofo]

Are you sure that this jersey is like a real on-field Watford jersey ? I can't imagine that tbh They just say "shirt" and I think it's just some basic T-shirt with some Watford logo.

  But the 1 btc prizepool is still worth it with only 2 mbtc buy in

It is a real on field Watford jersey 99%. When you apply for it you can chose between Home (black & yellow) and away (blue). They have a sponsorship agreement with Watford and I guess they just got a shitload of merchandise. I could be wrong of course but then there is still money prize which is very nice as tyKiwanuka mentioned

I see a lot of familiar names on the player list so see you guys soon.

Edit: What a start by FOMA AA and ALL IN in first hand. Nice man. And now I am kicked to another table...

[figmentofmyass]

A lottery gives them the incentive to participate and even if they don't finish in the points and thus have no shot at the Grand Final, they will get tickets for the lottery with each participation. (And a spot for small final)

You need to have a good foundation for such a series, i.e. regular players. The players that will leave, are the ones that only ever contribute to the pot, but never (are able to) take anything out of it. You have to make sure, that these players have an incentive to keep playing. A lottery (maybe) does that.

+1, i think that's really important to consider. a luck-based incentive (sort of like bad beat jackpots in cash games) could have a strong retaining effect on casual players, especially in the second half of the series.

i would also be open to something like 150 chips towards the lottery + 150 chips towards paying out the top 5 in points. i dunno if that's getting too complicated (1000+200+150+150) or too high of a total buy-in (1500 chips) but it would add another skill-based incentive to even things out.

i still think the runner's up tourney should be open for anyone who played x number of games, like a consolation tourney. only 3 people are gonna cash in the championship after all.

[figmentofmyass]

bump! are we still aiming to kick this series off next weekend?

i guess @efialtis can just set up a typical 1000 chip buy-in for sunday since these issues all relate to the "extra" buy-ins and can be sorted out separately. (are we playing sundays only? it still seems undecided but to be safe that should probably be the plan for this weekend)

can we get a simple yay/nay vote on some of this stuff?

-sunday only, or saturday/sunday?

-is everyone okay with 1000+200(championship)+200(lottery) buy-ins?

the lottery structure and total series length can be tweaked later on, but we should sort out the general playing schedule and buy-ins ASAP if we want to play next weekend.

calling all regulars.....

@Betwrong
@arallmuus
@1r0n1c
@Iv4n
@bitmutiny
@Hhampuz
@Steamtyme
@CCwatcher420
@tyKiwanuka
@SyGambler
@Improved
@Trofo
@BitcoinGirlClub
@CoinEraser
@cygan
@webtricks
@morvillz7z
@efialtis
@jayce
@Globb0

[tyKiwanuka]

-sunday only, or saturday/sunday?

-is everyone okay with 1000+200(championship)+200(lottery) buy-ins?

@Betwrong
@arallmuus -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@1r0n1c
@Iv4n -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@bitmutiny
@Hhampuz
@Steamtyme -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@CCwatcher420
@tyKiwanuka -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@SyGambler
@Improved
@Trofo -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@BitcoinGirlClub
@CoinEraser
@cygan
@webtricks -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@morvillz7z -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@efialtis -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@jayce
@Globb0

Whatever we decide on, if possible, people that intend to join all tournaments should send all extra chips upfront to efialtis, to reduce the hassle for him. Even if you are not eager to play every tournament, but maybe only 50%, you should just send for four tournaments then and request a refund at the end of the series (or donate). The less "single transactions" there are, the better.

[efialtis]

Thanks guys - that's also what I am waiting for and SwC are also waiting to get some more details - so if at least most of the regulars confirm they are fine with those 1.4k chips, I will have things up ASAP.

@Betwrong
@arallmuus
@1r0n1c
@Iv4n
@bitmutiny
@Hhampuz
@Steamtyme
@CCwatcher420
@tyKiwanuka -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@SyGambler
@Improved
@Trofo
@BitcoinGirlClub
@CoinEraser
@cygan
@webtricks
@morvillz7z
@efialtis -> Sunday/1400 CHECK
@jayce
@Globb0

[Trofo]

To keep the thread easier to browse I propose that you guys edit your previous posts and delete obsolete list of users. Only the latest one should be available.

I am currently on mobile so I am kindly asking the next person to put check next to my name as well. Hate to quote/copy/paste on mobile. I will do it myself in the evening if nobody takes care of it before.

Sunday is my choice as well, buy in is ok.

[Steamtyme]

1 tournament a weekend is all I really care about. Either day works so I'll vote Sunday.

I'm good with trying the 1400 I still think that's steep and would have preferred 1300 as this is just to create a lottery sidepot. So count me in.

I work this coming weekend so I likely won't be playing but will keep the option open.

[1r0n1c]

Hey guys, just to make sure that I got all things straight. The lottery is for everyone or for those guys who haven´t qualified for
the final table? I´m not the biggest fan of that lottery idea either way because it´s pure gamble but of course it wouldn´t stop me of playing the
next poker series 

Another thing which pops up in my mind is what we´re going to do when SwC won´t provide further 0,05BTC to the final table anymore.
Because those 200 Chips per fee will be definitely too less.

[tyKiwanuka]

The lottery is for everyone or for those guys who haven´t qualified for the final table?

The lottery would be for anyone. You get 10 tickets per tournament participation and 1 ticket for every point you got from our internal point system. See here how it would have looked for series #2.

I guess you will have no problem to be in contention for Grand Final, but lots of people are often discouraged to keep joining, because they have no shot at it. The last two tournaments of series #2 had only 14 players and we had the same tendency in series #1.

Another thing which pops up in my mind is what we´re going to do when SwC won´t provide further 0,05BTC to the final table anymore.
Because those 200 Chips per fee will be definitely too less.

For now we are a bit reliant on SwC. If they stop sponsoring, then we would have to think how to keep continuing. But that is nothing to worry about for now

[webtricks]

About first question, I will go with one tournament per week. My office is now open, moreover, football is back! All sums up that I will gonna have much more busy weekends than earlier. Hence, playing single tournament on Sunday will be best option for me. (Even then I may have to miss few but still try joining most of them).

About second question, I'm entirely ok with 1400 chips buy-in where 200 goes to lottery and 200 goes to championship. But my question is that do we need to create additional pool for championship? 0.05 BTC is already good incentive to play 9-men tournament. Moreover, reaching to championship already means that you have made some good money in first 8 legs. Won't that be better if we keep buy-in at 1200 where 1000 goes to tournament and 200 goes to lottery?

I have a question. I haven't read previous discussion in this thread. Are we planning to give points to every participant in reverse order or point system would still be limited to top 10 in every leg?

[morvillz7z]

I will try to make this very short, i would miss playing two games per weekend but i totally understand it can be tough for some people to make it, so one game per weekend - Sunday.

I'm okay with whatever buy-in structure we choose to go for, lottery sounds fine too.

I'd love to see some of the people who played in the first series comeback, if we could consistently get two full tables, that'll be awesome.

[iv4n]

Of course, I'm in, you didn't have to ask!
And I agree with any buy-in and with any structure! We have two successful series behind, I think we can test something new in this third series (lottery, higher buy-in)...
Any day you choose will be good, I will try to be there (I work shifts, this Sunday is my working day, but I am free after 19 pm).
Lets make this happen!

[arallmuus]

@arallmuus

Once a week, either Sunday or Saturday are fine for me and Yes Im okay with the 1400 buy in

Moreover, reaching to championship already means that you have made some good money in first 8 legs.

Not really, according to the spreadsheet from the second season you could get into the Grand Finale if you have 26 points ( If we discarded the AVG feature on the spreadsheet )

That means constant placing on minimum 7th rank for 6 times will get 24 points. You just need two more points to get into Grand Finale. The last two regular tournament was less than 15 people so it would be easy to just play safe and aim for 10th rank two times

IIRC only 3 or 4 places paid during the regular tournament so not everyone that get into the Grand Finale actually pocket some prizes during the regular game

[Globb0]

I am interested, but I have issues ie no job now so not that flush.

Is the lottery anyone can win it?

[arallmuus]

I am interested, but I have issues ie no job now so not that flush.

Is the lottery anyone can win it?

It should be because it is as an incentive for people to keep joining the game although they may dont have a chance to get into Grand Finale anymore. There is no clear set format regarding how this works yet but if you are interested you might want to check Tyki's post Here and Here

We might use this format for the lottery so more participant + points could means more lottery ticket


Lets play together on the 3rd series Globb0 

[figmentofmyass]

it sounds like we basically have consensus for sundays only. most people seem good with the 1400 chip buy-in too. i'm cool with both.

are we thinking 8 qualifiers then? or less?

Moreover, reaching to championship already means that you have made some good money in first 8 legs.

in series #2 i actually never cashed until the championship. lots of bubbles for me!

Are we planning to give points to every participant in reverse order or point system would still be limited to top 10 in every leg?

i think we've given up on changing the points structure. if we end up doing the reverse order scheme i think we should weight the top places.

Hey guys, just to make sure that I got all things straight. The lottery is for everyone or for those guys who haven´t qualified for
the final table? I´m not the biggest fan of that lottery idea either way because it´s pure gamble but of course it wouldn´t stop me of playing the
next poker series 

it's a pure gamble yes, which i normally don't like, but i like it because it encourages people to keep playing in the series.

if i've played the first 4 games and have 0 points going into game #5, the lottery + regular prize pools are still a pretty good reason to stay in the series, EV wise.

[efialtis]

Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!

[figmentofmyass]

Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!

thanks.

you sure you don't wanna go for 8 qualifiers though? i don't mind a 2 month series personally. i think some other folks expressed that view too. i kinda prefer a longer series to reduce variance and/or allow for missing a game. i also think SwC might be more likely to keep sponsoring if the championships weren't that frequent. i'll defer to the crowd of course, but 6 games feels a little short to me.

thoughts? maybe meet in the middle with 7 qualifiers? that would mean 8 weeks total for a series. that seems like a good round number.

[iv4n]

Okay then, it's going to be 1.4k chips per game with one game being played on each Sunday - we will have 6 qualifiers + a Grand Final (and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha).

Let me talk this over with SwC now!

thanks.

you sure you don't wanna go for 8 qualifiers though? i don't mind a 2 month series personally. i think some other folks expressed that view too. i kinda prefer a longer series to reduce variance and/or allow for missing a game. i also think SwC might be more likely to keep sponsoring if the championships weren't that frequent. i'll defer to the crowd of course, but 6 games feels a little short to me.

thoughts? maybe meet in the middle with 7 qualifiers? that would mean 8 weeks total for a series. that seems like a good round number.

First to say thank you Efi for arranging this once again! Can we do something for you man? You did a lot for all of us, can we repay you somehow?

I'm with you Foma , we can stretch this for two months, one game per week, why not? With keeping the same amount for grand finale and adding a lottery with 200 extra chips, this will be very interesting!
1.4 is ok, and I am smiling while I wrote this because I feel like an idiot for adding more and more suggestions, but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

[arallmuus]

but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.


6 tournaments + 1 Grand Finale is good for me. 7 weeks and Efialtis might have considered something to add to the following weeks for the winners I guess lol, I'll go with his decision

and I will also take care of a special event for the real winners, haha

[Trofo]

but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

I still feel our number one priority has to be attraction of new players even though reality is probably that only regulars will play. We can always make side bets or something to spice it up even more. For example I would gladly made a bit with another person at my table, or even several. I guess we don't have late reg now so there will not be many seating changes. When the game starts we can make a bet of let's say 1-2 mBTC and the person who last longest takes it. We did something like that for the first tournament of the first series. 

[iv4n]

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

Sorry, but I can't understand this. Both of you are saying that 100 chips makes some big difference here?
Who wishes to play will play with 1.2 or 1.5, because it's not a big difference. And if we wish to attract more people with lower buy-in than let's talk about 0.5 mbtc? Many people can afford that, and we can have 200 chips for entry, 150 chips for grand finale and lottery? Or you can arrange it anyhow, that will lead to lower prize pool! We can play for dollars or pennies, it's a big difference and there're people who don't wish to play for pennies.
And it's something we discussed, with more money you can offer more, and that can attract new players. In the end everything comes down to what you get for your money, for me 1.5 mbtc is reasonable amount because we will have a chance to win some tournament, for the sit in grand finale, lottery… and all that prizes depends on entry fee.

[famososMuertos]

but we can have some nice round number like 1.5 mbtc?! In the end all that money goes to bankroll and people will have motivation to play for some higher rewards.

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

I still feel our number one priority has to be attraction of new players even though reality is probably that only regulars will play. We can always make side bets or something to spice it up even more. For example I would gladly made a bit with another person at my table, or even several. I guess we don't have late reg now so there will not be many seating changes. When the game starts we can make a bet of let's say 1-2 mBTC and the person who last longest takes it. We did something like that for the first tournament of the first series. 

It's not really about how much a tournament costs, the focus that should be given is what type of players it is suitable for. If we look at the SWC ecosystem there is traffic that tends more to low stakes or micro buyin.

I play a $ 15 tournament not only because I want to but because my bankroll allows it, it is not about being able to put money in "x mmt", I could play the cost of $ 85 but I would be breaking my bankroll control rule. I support any initiative and I can even support it without the need to play tournaments.

First of all you always have to maintain objectivity, someone said that he would not play for pennies, ok. But then where is the community, player who does not have much if they must put their bankroll at risk.

When I speak of bankroll is the money you have to play or that you have planned to spend, here it is not about measuring your ability to make deposits, not having $ 85 or "$ x" does not mean that you are poor, etc. , it is only an amount "$x" destined to play.

There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Regards.

[Trofo]

There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Never even crossed my mind since there isn't so much of us here. Now we will have a tournament every Sunday and we could set up a satellite with minimal buy in on Saturday if that is not to much work for SwC. Maybe something with buy in of 200 chips, minimal 7 players and winner gets ticket for the tournament on Sunday. If there is more players winner gets some BTC as well or several players get the ticket.

I love the idea but have a feeling that it would create a lot of hassle for efi and SwC for minimal gains. 

[figmentofmyass]

There should even be some kind of satellite to those tournaments, to really include all levels of bankroll.

Regards.

you can directly buy into our tournaments with any 1k ticket---although that won't cover the separate league buy-ins sent to @efialtis.

unfortunately, there aren't too many scheduled satellites that pay 1k tickets (mostly 2k-5k tickets) but i do see 2 in the lobby---one starting in ~1 hour and one that runs in 2 days. there are also 3 types of sit-and-go satellites (buy-in 250 chips) that pay out 1k tickets.

i have a feeling that running direct satellites won't be too fruitful.

[Steamtyme]

In regards to number of qualifiers personally I would like it to be 7/8. I will likely miss half of the tournaments barring a slow Sunday at work. I don't think the 2 months time frame to the Championship will kill the "action". It would mostly allow people such as myself to still feel there is a chance to qualify even if you miss a few.

Nice catch on being able to use regular 1k satellites for our tourneys I wouldn't have thought of it. Specialty ones for us wouldn't work until we are much bigger. SWC shouldn't also have to essentially freeroll satellite tickets for us as well.

Anyone on the fence or looking for a freeroll should keep vigilant on the 3rd series thread once posted. There have been some generous members who have paid the entry for a new participant in the past. You might get lucky.

[arallmuus]

For regulars like us, this might not seems to be a big amount but we are trying to attract other people to join us as well so increasing the buy in further will only shut people down somehow.

Exactly, personally I couldn't care less if buy in is 1.4 or 1.5 mBTC, but we have to look at it from new players perspective. We are now close to 15$ per tournament. That is already a considerable sum of money in some parts of the world, especially if you have to pay it for 6 tournaments. 6 tournaments at this point cost 85$ which is quite big for new players.

Sorry, but I can't understand this. Both of you are saying that 100 chips makes some big difference here?
Who wishes to play will play with 1.2 or 1.5, because it's not a big difference. And if we wish to attract more people with lower buy-in than let's talk about 0.5 mbtc? Many people can afford that, and we can have 200 chips for entry, 150 chips for grand finale and lottery? Or you can arrange it anyhow, that will lead to lower prize pool! We can play for dollars or pennies, it's a big difference and there're people who don't wish to play for pennies.
And it's something we discussed, with more money you can offer more, and that can attract new players. In the end everything comes down to what you get for your money, for me 1.5 mbtc is reasonable amount because we will have a chance to win some tournament, for the sit in grand finale, lottery… and all that prizes depends on entry fee.

It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play

[iv4n]

It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play

So for 300 chips difference you would rather sacrifice a player like me who started playing before series, and in first tournaments we played there was 5-6 of us, for some "new player" that can come play one game and leave the series?
The main point of this tournament was fun for friends from btctalk, not to gather more players. More players would mean more fun, but as I remember in the beginning it was lets play poker and have fun, anyone who wishes to join is welcome to do that, we play nice poker with good poker players and above that with good people!
Lottery system is a nice motivation for me as well, and for every player! With higher buy in we will have higher prizes. Now you wish to attract more players with lower buy in, where we will have lower prizes, and I say lets make higher buy in, prizes will be higher, that will be a motivation for people to join! Now you tell me Arallmuss do you wish 50 new players in tournament with lower prizes, or you wish to see 10 new players and higher prizes? To make it more simple, do you think we need to put quality over quantity or quantity over quality?

[Trofo]

I am always for quality before quantity but we are loosing players as the tournaments go on and not gaining new ones to replace the ones who left. If we drop below 18 players (2 full tables) the game will start to get less interesting, at least for me. SwC will also probably stop sponsoring us if we drop below certain level. That is the reason why I am willing to make some concessions in order to keep the game running. I feel like one tournament per week was a step in the right direction so we will see how it goes in this series.

It is easy to raise buy ins and rewards for each tournament in unofficial way. Few of as just agree here on the forum for let's say 1000-2000 chips per person to spice it up and the one who stays on the table longest gets the money. I think all the regulars can be trusted with such amounts so there is no need to collect anything upfront. When the tournament ends we just send the chips to the winner.

[arallmuus]

It is a big different, The main point of this tournament was to gather more player from bitcointalk to form some community. That means a wide range variety of people is expected to join and alot of them might not be as good as you in poker games

Some might play then lose and never come back after their first game and some might feel hesitate to even try because of the high buy in therefore the lottery system was used to encourage people to play

So for 300 chips difference you would rather sacrifice a player like me who started playing before series, and in first tournaments we played there was 5-6 of us, for some "new player" that can come play one game and leave the series?
The main point of this tournament was fun for friends from btctalk, not to gather more players. More players would mean more fun, but as I remember in the beginning it was lets play poker and have fun, anyone who wishes to join is welcome to do that, we play nice poker with good poker players and above that with good people!
Lottery system is a nice motivation for me as well, and for every player! With higher buy in we will have higher prizes. Now you wish to attract more players with lower buy in, where we will have lower prizes, and I say lets make higher buy in, prizes will be higher, that will be a motivation for people to join!

Would be nice if you stop gunning down on me   . You know its not my call to decide things over here. If you want to have 1500 chips buy in you have to form consensus here by asking the others to agree with your opinion. I cant force my opinion neither can you, thats the whole nice stuff of forming consensus

Now you tell me Arallmuss do you wish 50 new players in tournament with lower prizes, or you wish to see 10 new players and higher prizes? To make it more simple, do you think we need to put quality over quantity or quantity over quality?

50 players with 300 chips buy in = 15000 chips prizepool
10 players with 1500 chips buy in = 15000 chips prizepool

Lower number of player doesnt always means higher prizepool . and thats 5 times higher buy in than the first one

[figmentofmyass]

It is easy to raise buy ins and rewards for each tournament in unofficial way. Few of as just agree here on the forum for let's say 1000-2000 chips per person to spice it up and the one who stays on the table longest gets the money. I think all the regulars can be trusted with such amounts so there is no need to collect anything upfront. When the tournament ends we just send the chips to the winner.

i agree that we're probably near the upper bound for buy-ins. there's no exact science to it, but my impression is that if we get much closer to 0.002 BTC per game it will discourage participation.

1400 chips/game is enough action for me, but i'm open to a last longer bet or other ways to make it interesting if it's not enough for others.

any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?

[Trofo]

any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?

Don't know why but 7 sounds strange to me I sort of expect an even number I guess

I already wrote somewhere that it doesn't really matter to me if it is anything between 4-10 tournaments. Less than four isn't a series and more than 10 would really stretch it too long. I suggested to @efi that he tries to feel out the SwC and see if they will give us better bonus if we play more tournaments in the series. If they will not, than it makes sense to play smaller number of tournaments, just enough to keep our sponsors happy.

[figmentofmyass]

any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?

Don't know why but 7 sounds strange to me I sort of expect an even number I guess

i prefer 8 myself---i'm just trying to find some compromise here.

when we add in the championship game, 7 qualifiers would mean 8 weeks total for the series, which seemed reasonable.

I already wrote somewhere that it doesn't really matter to me if it is anything between 4-10 tournaments. Less than four isn't a series and more than 10 would really stretch it too long.

6 is the minimum for me. it's really tough to recover from 2-3 bad (or missed) games in that kinda series. 8 qualifiers is really the sweet spot IMO.

I suggested to @efi that he tries to feel out the SwC and see if they will give us better bonus if we play more tournaments in the series. If they will not, than it makes sense to play smaller number of tournaments, just enough to keep our sponsors happy.

the less we bother SwC the better---that's my sense. the longer the series is, the more likely i think they are to keep sponsoring us, but maybe @efi has some more insight into this.

[arallmuus]

any other opinions on 6 qualifiers vs 8? like @Steamtyme i prefer 7 or 8 qualifiers. i know @efi prefers 6. can we meet in the middle with 7?

Don't know why but 7 sounds strange to me I sort of expect an even number I guess

i prefer 8 myself---i'm just trying to find some compromise here.

when we add in the championship game, 7 qualifiers would mean 8 weeks total for the series, which seemed reasonable.

6 or 7 seems fair to me, perhaps Efialtis had some talk with SWC representative and deem that this is the best for both party . Idk Im just guessing this but We can always drag it longer if needed in the middle of the series I guess ? As long as it doesnt need the assistance of SWC unlike changing the buy in or the starting stack then I guess we could

All it needs is just some agreement from the majority of the player but some people might think that this might put them to disadvantages if we change it midway of the series

[Betwrong]

Guys, if #3 Bitcointalk Poker Series is going to happen, maybe we should create a separate thread for it. To be honest, it was hard even for me, after rereading the latest posts, to figure out whether we are playing this Sunday or not, let alone for the potential new participants.

I personally agree with 6 or 7 qualifiers, and basically with anything @efi is going to come up with. I mean, all of us have already expressed our opinions, now, let @efi to say the final word.

[Trofo]

Guys, if #3 Bitcointalk Poker Series is going to happen, maybe we should create a separate thread for it. To be honest, it was hard even for me, after rereading the latest posts, to figure out whether we are playing this Sunday or not, let alone for the potential new participants.

I personally agree with 6 or 7 qualifiers, and basically with anything @efi is going to come up with. I mean, all of us have already expressed our opinions, now, let @efi to say the final word.

There will be an new thread for the new series as soon as @efi agrees everything with SwC. This thread is not related to particular series it is more like the ideas to help our series evolve.

... Idk Im just guessing this but We can always drag it longer if needed in the middle of the series I guess ? ...

All it needs is just some agreement from the majority of the player but some people might think that this might put them to disadvantages if we change it midway of the series

There should never be a change of rules or competition format or anything in the middle of the series. There will always be someone who will feel cheated and probably with good cause. Every time money is involved everything should be clear from the beginning, otherwise we are just inviting trouble.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

@BitcoinGirlClub

Sorry guys, I could not follow up since I was not online for last two weeks. It's a yes for me and will we have a tourney in this Sunday or it's going to start from the next Sunday?

<snip>

I figured it's not happening in this Sunday.

[figmentofmyass]

I mean, all of us have already expressed our opinions, now, let @efi to say the final word.

not really. unfortunately most just said they are cool with what everyone else decides and gave a range.

i have a hard preference for 8 qualifiers and think 6 is too short---barely enough to overcome variance. i'm still willing to play regardless, but if @efialtis is the only one who prefers 6 qualifiers vs 7 or 8 and this is negotiable, i definitely want more.

i just don't understand the logic of cutting the series 25% short---i don't see any benefits and no one (including @efialtis) has really articulated why we should do this. anyone?

this is just a casual sunday poker game. why do we need to compress everything and aim for the same kind of time frame as the last series? a 5-week series (#2) made sense when everyone was stuck in quarantine and playing 2 games a week but now, not so much.

[arallmuus]

Guys, if #3 Bitcointalk Poker Series is going to happen, maybe we should create a separate thread for it. To be honest, it was hard even for me, after rereading the latest posts, to figure out whether we are playing this Sunday or not, let alone for the potential new participants.

I personally agree with 6 or 7 qualifiers, and basically with anything @efi is going to come up with. I mean, all of us have already expressed our opinions, now, let @efi to say the final word.

There will be an new thread for the new series as soon as @efi agrees everything with SwC. This thread is not related to particular series it is more like the ideas to help our series evolve.

... Idk Im just guessing this but We can always drag it longer if needed in the middle of the series I guess ? ...

All it needs is just some agreement from the majority of the player but some people might think that this might put them to disadvantages if we change it midway of the series

There should never be a change of rules or competition format or anything in the middle of the series. There will always be someone who will feel cheated and probably with good cause. Every time money is involved everything should be clear from the beginning, otherwise we are just inviting trouble.

I guess then we all agree on 6 qualifier + 1 Grand Finale then. That also means, one or two bad weeks will make our chance to get into Grand Finale slip away. On the same time, It is going to be much more interesting because alot of us will be playing it safer unlike usual

Got some positive and some negative side to it but I think we can all adapt with the new one 

i just don't understand the logic of cutting the series 25% short---i don't see any benefits and no one (including @efialtis) has really articulated why we should do this. anyone?

this is just a casual sunday poker game. why do we need to compress everything and aim for the same kind of time frame as the last series? a 5-week series (#2) made sense when everyone was stuck in quarantine and playing 2 games a week but now, not so much.

Just my 2 cent opinion on this, dragging the tournament into 8 qualifier which is 2 months might resulted in lower hype for the game. Some player might be losing their enthusiast compared with the early state of the tournament especially when they have no chance to get into Grand Finale already

In the 2nd series, the last two regular games has less than 15 players. Especially with everyone going to back to their normal lives now, the last two games on the 3rd series might be getting lesser player. That means almost everyone is guaranteed to get points. Kinda bad and lame on the same time if there are only 12 players with top ten being rewarded with points isnt it?

Efi probably has another thing on his mind regarding this, we just need to wait I guess 

[efialtis]

Hey guys,

sorry for the silence - it's not like I am not doing things behind the scenes...

We are going to have a new series up shortly and we will be playing 8 qualifiers (one each Sunday) with a Grand Final as well as a runners-up tournament. The buy-in on SwC is still going to be 1 mBTC but we will have an extra 400 chips per tournament in order to introduce the lottery.

More details coming up asap.

[figmentofmyass]

Just my 2 cent opinion on this, dragging the tournament into 8 qualifier which is 2 months might resulted in lower hype for the game. Some player might be losing their enthusiast compared with the early state of the tournament especially when they have no chance to get into Grand Finale already

In the 2nd series, the last two regular games has less than 15 players.

i don't think this aspect has to do with how long the series is. the final games of any series will always have the fewest players. by that point, some players who are out of contention will have given up. i believe we had the same phenomenon in the first series.

this is why we are adding the lottery incentive. between the regular prize pools, lottery which will ~ pay for all your qualifier buy-ins, and the consolation tourney, i am hoping there is enough incentive now to keep runners in the final qualifiers. we'll see how it goes!

We are going to have a new series up shortly and we will be playing 8 qualifiers (one each Sunday) with a Grand Final as well as a runners-up tournament. The buy-in on SwC is still going to be 1 mBTC but we will have an extra 400 chips per tournament in order to introduce the lottery.

More details coming up asap.

woohoo! i'll be sending over the 3200 chips for the whole series soon.

i didn't realize it's saturday already. we should get a new thread up and get the word out ASAP......unless it's kicking off next weekend?

[Steamtyme]

i don't think this aspect has to do with how long the series is. the final games of any series will always have the fewest players. by that point, some players who are out of contention will have given up. i believe we had the same phenomenon in the first series.
this is why we are adding the lottery incentive. between the regular prize pools, lottery which will ~ pay for all your qualifier buy-ins, and the consolation tourney, i am hoping there is enough incentive now to keep runners in the final qualifiers. we'll see how it goes!

Agreed. I know personally I'm not exactly hyping up the Championship unless I'm in contention. I still play tourneys if I'm out of the running but I'm just focusing on that prizepool. Don't get me wrong love to hear how it went, but I personally see it as an extra and focus on the individual qualifiers more. Probably why I either finish well or bust out without thinking of the grander scheme. I imagine there are quite a few who had played previously that would stick it out knowing there is a non-skill based lottery available.

We are going to have a new series up shortly and we will be playing 8 qualifiers (one each Sunday) with a Grand Final as well as a runners-up tournament. The buy-in on SwC is still going to be 1 mBTC but we will have an extra 400 chips per tournament in order to introduce the lottery.
More details coming up asap.

woohoo! i'll be sending over the 3200 chips for the whole series soon.
i didn't realize it's saturday already. we should get a new thread up and get the word out ASAP......unless it's kicking off next weekend?

I'm guessing it's next weekend, with the short notice but who know efialtis and SWC  are full of surprises. In the meantime let's spread the word. I will continue to drop it in the chat on SWC, as it should be right up most of their alley. The only difference is this is a freezeout and I don't think SWC hosts any of those.

Great new looking forward to seeing everyone at the tables again soon.

[efialtis]

Just my 2 cent opinion on this, dragging the tournament into 8 qualifier which is 2 months might resulted in lower hype for the game. Some player might be losing their enthusiast compared with the early state of the tournament especially when they have no chance to get into Grand Finale already

In the 2nd series, the last two regular games has less than 15 players.

i don't think this aspect has to do with how long the series is. the final games of any series will always have the fewest players. by that point, some players who are out of contention will have given up. i believe we had the same phenomenon in the first series.

this is why we are adding the lottery incentive. between the regular prize pools, lottery which will ~ pay for all your qualifier buy-ins, and the consolation tourney, i am hoping there is enough incentive now to keep runners in the final qualifiers. we'll see how it goes!

We are going to have a new series up shortly and we will be playing 8 qualifiers (one each Sunday) with a Grand Final as well as a runners-up tournament. The buy-in on SwC is still going to be 1 mBTC but we will have an extra 400 chips per tournament in order to introduce the lottery.

More details coming up asap.

woohoo! i'll be sending over the 3200 chips for the whole series soon.

i didn't realize it's saturday already. we should get a new thread up and get the word out ASAP......unless it's kicking off next weekend?

So sorry to disappoint but start is going to be next Sunday :/

[Trofo]

So sorry to disappoint but start is going to be next Sunday :/

This is actually a good news for me. Tomorrow I am driving 6+ hours to the summer house and wife would probably killed me if I said that I intend to play poker whole evening on our first day there while she has to unpack and clean everything

Thanks, for setting it up @efialtis.

See you all soon across the green table.

[arallmuus]

We are going to have a new series up shortly and we will be playing 8 qualifiers (one each Sunday) with a Grand Final as well as a runners-up tournament.

Now everyone will be happy with this 8 qualifiers .

So sorry to disappoint but start is going to be next Sunday :/

Next week is the ideal time for this to kick in. Some people might be missing this information

this is why we are adding the lottery incentive. between the regular prize pools, lottery which will ~ pay for all your qualifier buy-ins, and the consolation tourney, i am hoping there is enough incentive now to keep runners in the final qualifiers. we'll see how it goes!

Lets just hope for the best that this will attract alot of new guy to come and try. To be honest Im now more excited to win the lottery then get myself onto the Grand Finale lol

If we ended up using the exact same system that Tyki proposed for the lottery, those who play well during the qualifier will has better chance of getting it.  . I'd say triple profit on that, you get more tickets, higher points + you could be cashing in

This is actually a good news for me. Tomorrow I am driving 6+ hours to the summer house and wife would probably killed me if I said that I intend to play poker whole evening on our first day there while she has to unpack and clean everything

Thanks, for setting it up @efialtis.

See you all soon across the green table.

Quite impossible to set this up within 24 hours but consider this your lucky day Trofo   See you on the table

[figmentofmyass]

So sorry to disappoint but start is going to be next Sunday :/

no worries at all! we know you're a busy guy. we should do this right and get the word out first anyway. less than 24 hours notice would have netted a bad turnout.

i just shipped 3200 chips your way for all the buy-ins. please confirm receipt when you get a chance. i'm looking forward to seeing the new thread.

To be honest Im now more excited to win the lottery then get myself onto the Grand Finale lol

winning the lottery is kinda like getting 2nd place cash prize in a satellite that only awards 1 ticket---a nice consolation but definitely not the #1 goal.

you can win the lottery and qualify for the championship, right? i looked back through the thread and that isn't clear to me now. that seems ideal, otherwise i think we're segregating too much of the prize pool (half the extra buy-ins) for non-finalists. i think all the consolation stuff should provide additional opportunities to win money, but not at the expense of the finalists. they should get that EV too.

[Trofo]

you can win the lottery and qualify for the championship, right? i looked back through the thread and that isn't clear to me now. that seems ideal, otherwise i think we're segregating too much of the prize pool (half the extra buy-ins) for non-finalists. i think all the consolation stuff should provide additional opportunities to win money, but not at the expense of the finalists. they should get that EV too.

Yes, lottery is for all and better performing players get more tickets but participation is awarded heavily.
10 tickets per participation and one for each point you manage to get. If you won every tournament you would have double the tickets from the guy that participated in all of them and didn't win a single point. Feels like a perfect balance to award participation and give some extra points for ability as well.
Here follows the links for 2 most important posts on the subject by tyKiwanuka
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5247993.msg54576189#msg54576189
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5247993.msg54612710#msg54612710

By the way @tyKiwanuka, very nice thought out and I like the idea more and more, glad it made the cut for the new series.

[Betwrong]

~
Yes, lottery is for all and better performing players get more tickets but participation is awarded heavily.
10 tickets per participation and one for each point you manage to get. If you won every tournament you would have double the points from the guy that participated in all of them and didn't win a single point. Feels like a perfect balance to award participation and give some extra points for ability as well.
~

At first I missed this part completely. This scheme indeed encourages participation, and I think it should be written in bold letters in the upcoming #3 Bitcointalk Poker Series' thread.

[tyKiwanuka]

I made a little rule book to get a better overview and understanding about our complicated series @efialtis, feel free to use (parts of) them for the thread for #3 series. I am also calling especially the native speakers to improve the wordings, grammar, add missing information etc.


Index

• General Information & Series Structure
• Entry Fees & Passwords
• The Qualifier Tournaments
• Internal Point Structure
• The Grand Final
• The Small Final
• The Lottery
• The Spreadsheet
• Miscellaneous

General Information & Series Structure

The Bitcointalk Poker Series sponsored by SwC Poker can be joined by any interested poker player with a Bitcointalk account. If you don't have a Bitcointalk account yet, feel free to make one. We would be happy, if you engage in discussions about the series and/or Poker, but it's not mandatory. We welcome players of any skill level, any age, any gender, any colour. The tournaments will be played on Sundays 5PM GMT.

The series will feature 8 qualifier tournaments, a Grand Final, a Small Final, a lottery and hopefully lots of fun and suckouts. There is an internal points structure, where you accumulate points to qualify for the Grand Final. Every participation will also give you tickets to the lottery. If you are a regular player, you will automatically qualify for the Small Final.

We play Texas No Limit Hold'em, the starting stacks are 5,000 chips, blind levels are 10 minutes and there is no late registration available.

You might also want to join the Bitcointalk Poker Community Server on Discord: Join here.

The first two series:
Series #1
Series #2

Entry Fees & Passwords

The entry fee per tournament is 1,400 Chips or 0.0014 BTC.
1,000 chips you pay for registering for the tournaments directly at SwC.
400 chips you send to the SwC account "youcantwin" via P2P transfer. 200 of those chips go towards the prize pool for the Grand Final, the other 200 chips towards the lottery.

There are no entry fees for the Grand Final and the Small Final.

The tournaments are password protected, you will get the passwords via Personal Message (PM) in this forum, after you have sent the 400 chips per tournament to youcantwin. If you intend to join all 8 qualifier tournaments, it would be helpful, if you send all extra fees (3,200 chips) upfront.

The Qualifier Tournaments

A total of 8 qualifier tournaments will be played inside 8 weeks, Sundays 5PM GMT. If possible, register as early as possible, since there is no late registration available. Just send 400 chips to youcantwin, get the password and register for the tournament for a fee of 1,000 chips.

Q#1: 06/28/2020
Q#2: 07/05/2020
Q#3: 07/12/2020
Q#4: 07/19/2020
Q#5: 07/26/2020
Q#6: 08/02/2020
Q#7: 08/09/2020
Q#8: 08/16/2020

Internal Point Structure

To determine who will qualify for the Grand Final, we have an internal point structure, where you get a number of points for each tournament, when you finished inside the Top10.

10th = 1 Point
9th = 2 Points
8th = 3 Points
7th = 4 Points
6th = 5 Points
5th = 6 Points
4th = 7 Points
3rd = 8 Points
2nd = 9 Points
1st = 10 Points

If two or more players have the same amount of points after 8 tournaments, the average finishing position in all tournaments participated will be the tie-breaker.

The Grand Final

The 9 players with the most points from our internal point system will be eligible to play the Grand Final, which will take place on 08/23/2020. You will automatically get registered for this tournament and don't have to pay an entry fee. As in the past, SwC is sponsoring 0.05 BTC among other things for this tournament and the 200 chips per tournament and participant from the qualifiers will be part of the prize pool as well. This additional prize money for the Top3 will get sent to you via P2P transfer on SwC.

1st: 50% of Prize Pool + BIG BTC Ticket worth 0.01 BTC & a lovely SwC Flexfit Hat
2nd: 30% of Prize Pool
3rd: 20% of Prize Pool

The Small Final

Every player who joined at least 5 of the 8 qualifying tournaments, will be eligible to play in the Small Final, no matter how many points they accumulated. Players that didn't finish in the money (i.e. outside Top3) in the Grand Final, will be eligible to play in the Small Final as well. You will automatically get registered for this tournament and don't have to pay an entry fee.

The date and prize money is TBA.

The Lottery

To give anyone the chance to win some money, we introduced a lottery for the third series, which will be funded from the extra fees you send to youcantwin. With each participation you will get 10 tickets for the lottery. For every point you get via the internal point system, you will get one additional ticket. So if you played 6 tournaments and accumulated 18 points, you will have 78 tickets for the lottery. If you played only one tournament and did get no points, you will have 10 tickets. Etc.

After those 8 qualifying tournaments, the draw from a trusted member will take place via a random number generator. Each player can only win one prize from this lottery, so if you win a prize in first draw, the rest of your tickets will get voided. The number of prizes depends on the amount collected for the lottery. For every 10,000 chips, there will be one prize. If the total pool is 18,000 chips, there will be two prizes of 9,000 chips each. If the total pool is 24,000 chips, there will be three prizes of 8,000 chips each. Etc.

The prizes will get sent to your SwC account via P2P transfer. The date of the lottery is TBA.

The Spreadsheet

You can follow and monitor all happenings in the spreadsheet: Bitcointalk SwC Poker Championship Series

If you have any questions or find any mistakes, feel free to mention it in the dedicated threads or PM @efialtis or @tyKiwanuka.

Miscellaneous

If you paid extra fees upfront, but aren't able to participate in a tournament for whatever reason, the extra fee will be considered a donation, unless you request a refund. You won't get any tickets for the lottery, if you don't participate in a tournament, even if you donate the extra fee.

Any dispute should get resolved via majority decision.

[efialtis]

I made a little rule book to get a better overview and understanding about our complicated series @eifialtis, feel free to use (parts of) them for the thread for #3 series. I am also calling especially the native speakers to improve the wordings, grammar, add missing information etc.


Index

• General Information & Series Structure
• Entry Fees & Passwords
• The Qualifier Tournaments
• Internal Point Structure
• The Grand Final
• The Small Final
• The Lottery
• The Spreadsheet
• Miscellaneous

General Information & Series Structure

The Bitcointalk Poker Series sponsored by SwC Poker can be joined by any interested poker player with a Bitcointalk account. If you don't have a Bitcointalk account yet, feel free to make one. We would be happy, if you engage in discussions about the series and/or Poker, but it's not mandatory. We welcome players of any skill level, any age, any gender, any colour. The tournaments will be played on Sundays 5PM GMT.

The series will feature 8 qualifier tournaments, a Grand Final, a Small Final, a lottery and hopefully lots of fun and suckouts. There is an internal points structure, where you accumulate points to qualify for the Grand Final. Every participation will also give you tickets to the lottery. If you are a regular player, you will automatically qualify for the Small Final.

We play Texas No Limit Hold'em, the starting stacks are 5,000 chips, blind levels are 10 minutes and there is no late registration available.

You might also want to join the Bitcointalk Poker Community Server on Discord: Join here.

The first two series:
Series #1
Series #2

Entry Fees & Passwords

The entry fee per tournament is 1,400 Chips or 0.0014 BTC.
1,000 chips you pay for registering for the tournaments directly at SwC.
400 chips you send to the SwC account "youcantwin" via P2P transfer. 200 of those chips go towards the prize pool for the Grand Final, the other 200 chips towards the lottery.

There are no entry fees for the Grand Final and the Small Final.

The tournaments are password protected, you will get the passwords via Personal Message (PM) in this forum, after you have sent the 400 chips per tournament to youcantwin. If you intend to join all 8 qualifier tournaments, it would be helpful, if you send all extra fees (3,200 chips) upfront.

The Qualifier Tournaments

A total of 8 qualifier tournaments will be played inside 8 weeks, Sundays 5PM GMT. If possible, register as early as possible, since there is no late registration available. Just send 400 chips to youcantwin, get the password and register for the tournament for a fee of 1,000 chips.

Q#1: 06/28/2020
Q#2: 07/05/2020
Q#3: 07/12/2020
Q#4: 07/19/2020
Q#5: 07/26/2020
Q#6: 08/02/2020
Q#7: 08/09/2020
Q#8: 08/16/2020

Internal Point Structure

To determine who will qualify for the Grand Final, we have an internal point structure, where you get a number of points for each tournament, when you finished inside the Top10.

10th = 1 Point
9th = 2 Points
8th = 3 Points
7th = 4 Points
6th = 5 Points
5th = 6 Points
4th = 7 Points
3rd = 8 Points
2nd = 9 Points
1st = 10 Points

If two or more players have the same amount of points after 8 tournaments, the average finishing position in all tournaments participated will be the tie-breaker.

The Grand Final

The 9 players with the most points from our internal point system will be eligible to play the Grand Final, which will take place on 08/23/2020. You will automatically get registered for this tournament and don't have to pay an entry fee. As in the past, SwC is sponsoring 0.05 BTC for this tournament and the 200 chips per tournament and participant from the qualifiers will be part of the prize pool as well. This additional prize money for the Top3 will get sent to you via P2P transfer on SwC.

1st 50% of Prize Pool + BIG BTC Ticket + SwC Flexfit Hat
2nd 30% of Prize Pool
3rd 20% of Prize Pool

The Small Final

Every player who joined at least 5 of the 8 qualifying tournaments, will be eligible to play in the Small Final, no matter how many points they accumulated. Players that didn't finish in the money (i.e. outside Top3) in the Grand Final, will be eligible to play in the Small Final as well. You will automatically get registered for this tournament and don't have to pay an entry fee.

The date and prize money is TBA.

The Lottery

To give anyone the chance to win some money, we introduced a lottery for the third series, which will be funded from the extra fees you send to youcantwin. With each participation you will get 10 tickets for the lottery. For every point you get via the internal point system, you will get one additional ticket. So if you played 6 tournaments and accumulated 18 points, you will have 78 tickets for the lottery. If you played one only one tournament and did get no points, you will have 10 tickets. Etc.

After those 8 qualifying tournaments, the draw from a trusted member will take place via a random number generator. Each player can only win one prize from this lottery, so if you win a prize in first draw, the rest of your tickets will get voided. The number of prizes depends on the amount collected for the lottery. For every 10,000 chips, there will be one prize. If the total pool is 18,000 chips, there will be two prizes of 9,000 chips each. If the total pool is 24,000 chips, there will be three prizes of 8,000 chips each. Etc.

The prizes will get sent to your SwC account via P2P transfer. The date of the lottery is TBA.

The Spreadsheet

You can follow and monitor all happenings in the spreadsheet: Bitcointalk SwC Poker Championship Series

If you have any questions or find any mistakes, feel free to mention it in the dedicated threads or PM @efialtis or @tyKiwanuka.

Miscellaneous

If you paid extra fees upfront, but aren't able to participate in a tournament for whatever reason, the extra fee will be considered a donation, unless you request a refund. You won't get any tickets for the lottery, if you don't participate in a tournament, even if you donate the extra fee. (Does that make sense ?)

Any dispute should get resolved via majority decision.

You are simply amazing man - thanks mate!! Will definitely use (more than just a few parts).

[figmentofmyass]

The number of prizes depends on the amount collected for the lottery. For every 10,000 chips, there will be one prize. If the total pool is 18,000 chips, there will be two prizes of 9,000 chips each. If the total pool is 24,000 chips, there will be three prizes of 8,000 chips each. Etc.

thanks for putting this together.

can we generate a confirmed payout structure for the lottery, so there is no ambiguity/disputes about how it gets paid out?

payouts should be flat/even like a satellite. we just need to know the exact cutoff where 2 people get paid, vs 3 people or 4 people etc. for instance, what happens if the total pool is 21k chips? 3 people get paid 7k, or 2 people get 10.5k?

[tyKiwanuka]

can we generate a confirmed payout structure for the lottery, so there is no ambiguity/disputes about how it gets paid out?

payouts should be flat/even like a satellite. we just need to know the exact cutoff where 2 people get paid, vs 3 people or 4 people etc. for instance, what happens if the total pool is 21k chips? 3 people get paid 7k, or 2 people get 10.5k?

Hehe, I don't make the rules, I just propose them and then we can discuss them In my mind, a new prize is created as soon as we get over the next 10k threshold. So at 20k chips, you would have 2 prizes á 10k chips and at 20k+1 chip, there would already be 3 prizes á 6,667 chips. Then next/fourth prize would get created at 30k+1 chip.

In last series we would have had 29k chips in the lottery pool for 3 prizes á 9,666 chips. With a low 30k+ pool, we would have 4 prizes á 7,500+ chips. But I hope that we cross 40k barrier, which would mean 8,000+ chips for 5 different players.

But nothing is set in stone, we can change this easily of course, we should just find a consensus before next Sunday.

[figmentofmyass]

can we generate a confirmed payout structure for the lottery, so there is no ambiguity/disputes about how it gets paid out?

payouts should be flat/even like a satellite. we just need to know the exact cutoff where 2 people get paid, vs 3 people or 4 people etc. for instance, what happens if the total pool is 21k chips? 3 people get paid 7k, or 2 people get 10.5k?

Hehe, I don't make the rules, I just propose them and then we can discuss them In my mind, a new prize is created as soon as we get over the next 10k threshold. So at 20k chips, you would have 2 prizes á 10k chips and at 20k+1 chip, there would already be 3 prizes á 6,667 chips. Then next/fourth prize would get created at 30k+1 chip.

In last series we would have had 29k chips in the lottery pool for 3 prizes á 9,666 chips. With a low 30k+ pool, we would have 4 prizes á 7,500+ chips. But I hope that we cross 40k barrier, which would mean 8,000+ chips for 5 different players.

But nothing is set in stone, we can change this easily of course, we should just find a consensus before next Sunday.

that's the key, i just wanna get these things sorted now so nobody feels at a disadvantage after the first qualifier.

that structure looks fine to me. it hadn't occurred to me that as soon as each 10k chip threshold is crossed, a new prize would be created. so we should generally land in the 7k-10k range---that's a good number IMO, a big chunk of the total series buy-ins. i like it.

[Betwrong]

can we generate a confirmed payout structure for the lottery, so there is no ambiguity/disputes about how it gets paid out?

payouts should be flat/even like a satellite. we just need to know the exact cutoff where 2 people get paid, vs 3 people or 4 people etc. for instance, what happens if the total pool is 21k chips? 3 people get paid 7k, or 2 people get 10.5k?

Hehe, I don't make the rules, I just propose them and then we can discuss them In my mind, a new prize is created as soon as we get over the next 10k threshold. So at 20k chips, you would have 2 prizes á 10k chips and at 20k+1 chip, there would already be 3 prizes á 6,667 chips. Then next/fourth prize would get created at 30k+1 chip.

In last series we would have had 29k chips in the lottery pool for 3 prizes á 9,666 chips. With a low 30k+ pool, we would have 4 prizes á 7,500+ chips. But I hope that we cross 40k barrier, which would mean 8,000+ chips for 5 different players.

But nothing is set in stone, we can change this easily of course, we should just find a consensus before next Sunday.

I hope for that too. What's needed is around 35 participants playing most of the games, or 25 playing all the qualifiers. I think it looks realistic. And the fact that 5 different players will get 8,000+ chips each, as a side prize, surely can be attractive for the potential new participants.

As of now, the tournament isn't scheduled on SwC. Are we playing this Sunday or not?

[tyKiwanuka]

I hope for that too. What's needed is around 35 participants playing most of the games, or 25 playing all the qualifiers. I think it looks realistic.

Series #1 had 26 players per tournament on average, which would have resulted in 41,600 chips lottery pool and 5 prizes á 8,320 chips. Series #2 had only ~18 players on average then. My guess is, that we will have something inbetween for Series #3, but hope for more.

As of now, the tournament isn't scheduled on SwC. Are we playing this Sunday or not?

From all I know efialtis is at it, but waiting for response/confirmation from SwC.

[Trofo]

Series #1 had 26 players per tournament on average, which would have resulted in 41,600 chips lottery pool and 5 prizes á 8,320 chips. Series #2 had only ~18 players on average then. My guess is, that we will have something inbetween for Series #3, but hope for more.

I am hoping you are right and all the regulars will remain for this 3rd series. 18 players - 2 full tables are about as low as it can get and still be fun. I am a bit afraid that we will lose more people than attract going forward but hopefully we managed to stop the exodus by playing just one instead of 2 tournaments per week. Time will tell, can't wait for the series to start

[figmentofmyass]

i hope we get an update soon! announcing the series last minute won't exactly boost turnout for the first qualifier. the sunday game (if it's being played) is less than 4 days out at this point.

[Betwrong]

i hope we get an update soon! announcing the series last minute won't exactly boost turnout for the first qualifier. the sunday game (if it's being played) is less than 4 days out at this point.

Maybe we can do a headcount here to estimate the number participants?

If we are playing this Sunday, I'm in. Let's hear from others.

Also, I think it wouldn't hurt if a PM was sent to everybody who participated at least once in the previous Bitcontalk Poker Tournaments, saying to them that we are going to have another one.

[iv4n]

i hope we get an update soon! announcing the series last minute won't exactly boost turnout for the first qualifier. the sunday game (if it's being played) is less than 4 days out at this point.

Maybe we can do a headcount here to estimate the number participants?

If we are playing this Sunday, I'm in. Let's hear from others.

Also, I think it wouldn't hurt if a PM was sent to everybody who participated at least once in the previous Bitcontalk Poker Tournaments, saying to them that we are going to have another one.

Some of us didn't miss a game, and we will try to play all future ones! I am definitely in, and I wait for announcement every day! It's one of the first things I check every morning, and a few times per day.
The Sunday game is less than 3 days, and I am slowly losing hope that tournament will start this week! If there's no tournament are you for some casual tournament with 1mbtc buy in, like in the beginning? Nothing special, maybe Efi or Ty can organize that with SwC? I would play, that can be like warming up for upcoming series?

[Steamtyme]

If there's no tournament are you for some casual tournament with 1mbtc buy in, like in the beginning? Nothing special, maybe Efi or Ty can organize that with SwC? I would play, that can be like warming up for upcoming series?

I would hold off on trying to throw something together quickly just because of this

So sorry to disappoint but start is going to be next Sunday :/

If there is no tournament though we could all meet up in one of the other tournaments they run, or hop onto some cash tables at 1/2 or 5/10.

It just makes me thinkn everythign is in the works and that maybe SWC forgot to add it to the schedule or efialtis forgot to confirm. I'm hoping it pops up today or tomorrow. I also don't want to possibly cause some miscommunication with SWC in regards to the series.

I did have a thought though on trying to increase traffic, at least in trying to bring over some of their regs. It centers around information on ho0w easy it is to get the password. For instance if someone clicks on the tournament something small about how they just need to register on the forum to get the password. That or "Check to get password" attached to the tournament title. There is a chance that because it is a password protected tournament with the lock symbol some users don't look at it. I'll be playing 2 tournaments tonight and will again encourage people to come play the series.

I'm also offering up assisting with picking up any of the slack if you need efialtis. I don't mind doing any of the go between or confirmation/information gathering to assist in keeping the series tournaments running smoothly.

[morvillz7z]

I've noticed that SwC_Poker account hasn't logged in since last Friday, they also haven't been very active here on the forum, like two posts in the last two weeks. Maybe they are on vacation or something and it's hard to set up the tournament, i don't know...i'm just speculating here because i have nothing better to do right now. 

Anyway, i just wanted to say that i'm a lock if it starts this Sunday.

[tyKiwanuka]

Everything will be fine I have pimped the spreadsheet already to easier keep track of our lottery, so ready to go. I also added some flags, to show the internationality of our series. I might have missed some flags, since I don't know the nationality of all players or the country they live in. If your flag is missing and you want to have it added, just make a peep. And I am not sure about that UK flag tbh, but I think at least one of the regular players is from UK (?).

Not sure, if people like to have those flags there in general, I can delete them again if wanted.

[figmentofmyass]

i'm in for sunday. like @Steamtyme said, maybe we can get a cash game or something going otherwise.

I did have a thought though on trying to increase traffic, at least in trying to bring over some of their regs. It centers around information on ho0w easy it is to get the password. For instance if someone clicks on the tournament something small about how they just need to register on the forum to get the password. That or "Check to get password" attached to the tournament title. There is a chance that because it is a password protected tournament with the lock symbol some users don't look at it. I'll be playing 2 tournaments tonight and will again encourage people to come play the series.

that's definitely part of it.

it's a tricky issue, being that we need to collect the additional buy-ins from players. i've discussed in the SwC chat a couple times and my impression is those regs just wanna register directly and play. you could give them the password and they would play just for the direct buy-in and prize pool, but i don't sense much interest in the series structure and additional buy-ins. we did manage to get @ceehe on board in the first series, but he mostly dropped out in the second.

Everything will be fine I have pimped the spreadsheet already to easier keep track of our lottery, so ready to go. I also added some flags, to show the internationality of our series. I might have missed some flags, since I don't know the nationality of all players or the country they live in. If your flag is missing and you want to have it added, just make a peep.

awesome job, looks great. nice touch with the flags.

[efialtis]

Hey guys - here we go, series #3 is live and starting on Sunday! 

Series #3 thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5258134

Nb. I really need to edit this thread's op when I get to it... 

[Steamtyme]

hey I forgot I wanted to bring this up when the series started. In the future for the small final I would like to see us lower the threshold to participating in 3 or 4 qualifiers to qualify for it.

Personally there will just be some games I can't make which can be up to half of the qualifiers depending on my work schedule. This can already negatively affect my chances of qualifying for the main, and feels sort of like a double whammy. Curious what others think about this. There could be a stipulation where at least one of the games needs to be the final 3 qualifiers if the worry is just about people joining early and stopping once they can't make the finale.

[figmentofmyass]

hey I forgot I wanted to bring this up when the series started. In the future for the small final I would like to see us lower the threshold to participating in 3 or 4 qualifiers to qualify for it.

Personally there will just be some games I can't make which can be up to half of the qualifiers depending on my work schedule. This can already negatively affect my chances of qualifying for the main, and feels sort of like a double whammy. Curious what others think about this.

the 5 game requirement does seem like a little much. i think only 1 was required in the first series.

the small final isn't huge from an EV standpoint, less than a buy-in. i'm not too worried about it. tbh, i was fine with just requiring 1 qualifier and letting everyone play, vs barring the top 3 from the championship.

i see it more as just a one-off private freeroll for fun than anything else, not a serious consideration.

There could be a stipulation where at least one of the games needs to be the final 3 qualifiers if the worry is just about people joining early and stopping once they can't make the finale.

that's fine with me if people think its warranted. my hope is the lottery will take care of that problem.

[Steamtyme]

the small final isn't huge from an EV standpoint, less than a buy-in. i'm not too worried about it. tbh, i was fine with just requiring 1 qualifier and letting everyone play, vs barring the top 3 from the championship.

Yeah I'm definitely not looking at it from a prizepool perspective just a chance to participate and play. I am as active as I can possibly be in the series and I'm sure there are a few others who might actually want a shot at the prize that may not make 5 tourneys either.

Just a thought, as it was the only thing that sticks out to me with our current format.

[tyKiwanuka]

I am fine with whatever number of participations it will be to qualify, can be 1 as well. When putting up the 5/8, I had in mind that it would be an additional incentive to the lottery to join the tournaments regularly. But the prize pool for small final is actually indeed too low to make that a target-worthy.
As it seems, neither the lottery nor anything else could attract more players, so I guess we should be happy with any (new) players who decide to join any given tournament.

[Globb0]

I still think the lottery should just be for the entries, not extra for winning.

Also I cant talk this week it says I need 50 Krill, before it was 1.

Did something change in the settings?

[Steamtyme]

I still think the lottery should just be for the entries, not extra for winning.
Also I cant talk this week it says I need 50 Krill, before it was 1.
Did something change in the settings?

Damn sorry Globbo. Yeah I just checked the SWC chat and they did increase it. Not sure why or why they didn't grandfather older accounts. You should inquire in the SWC thread, maybe they'll hook it up. If I could send you krill I would.

[figmentofmyass]

As it seems, neither the lottery nor anything else could attract more players, so I guess we should be happy with any (new) players who decide to join any given tournament.

i didn't really think the lottery would attract new players. my hope was that it would keep regulars playing in the second half of the series, as people drop out of contention for the championship.

too bad about the 50 krill chat requirement. that was the old requirement, a year or more ago, before they lowered it to 1. i wonder what caused the change.

i've got a few hundred krill after relatively light low stakes play, so it shouldn't be out of reach for too long @Globb0.

[Globb0]

As it seems, neither the lottery nor anything else could attract more players, so I guess we should be happy with any (new) players who decide to join any given tournament.

i didn't really think the lottery would attract new players. my hope was that it would keep regulars playing in the second half of the series, as people drop out of contention for the championship.

too bad about the 50 krill chat requirement. that was the old requirement, a year or more ago, before they lowered it to 1. i wonder what caused the change.

i've got a few hundred krill after relatively light low stakes play, so it shouldn't be out of reach for too long @Globb0.

hahaha I put my heart and soul into 1 krill