[Quads]

Scott posted this in his forum, and it got me to thinking. I was talking to the Kid about it the other night, ad we figured it would be worth a thread in BYOC to see who else would be interested.

This is to put together a WSOP 2006 satellite tournament in our home games. We talked about this last year for the main event, but it never got to page 2 of the discussions.

This would be for entry into one of the smaller WSOP events, like the $1500, $2000, or $2,500 event, not the main event.

I'd like to see something around a $100 buy-in. We usually have up to 18 to 20 people in the larger tourneys that are hosted, so this number could work. If it were smaller, then we could run this in several lower buy in tourneys at lower stakes (say $50) to build the final table.

So, if there's 20 players, there would be $1,500 WSOP buy-in for 1st place, and award 60% for 2nd and 40% for 3rd of any remaining money.

If we ran this in a multi table manner, I would say we do 3 tourneys. $50 to $100 buy in. Take the top 3 from each one, which would round out a final table of 9 players. The winner of the final, goes on to the WSOP.

OK, so here's the table share idea. Anyone who makes the final 9 players in this satellite will be entitled to table share of the prize money at the WSOP if the winner of the satellite finishes in the money. I'm thinking the satellite winner gets 84% of any WSOP prize money he wins and the other 8 final table players each get 2% (16% / 8 remaining players).

Yes, going out in 10th place would really, really suck. Going out on the bubble usually does.

I think we would need a lot more planning and documentation to outline the details and a pretty solid agreement between the final table and the winner who goes to play the WSOP event in Vegas. Since the WSOP winners list is published, it can be validated what he wins.

The idea behind having a table share payout is that it encourages people to play this satellite because if they lose it gives them a sort of 2nd chance by having their dog in the fight at the WSOP.

What do you guys (and gals) think?

 

[joerammerjr]

I think that this is a great idea and one that I would definently participate in!

Three tourneys, each with the top three finishers playing in a seperate 9 man tourney sounds good. I do agree that the exact terms should be written up and signed by everybody participating before they play in the preliminary tourney.

There should also be clauses in there like what would happen if say the overall winnner of the tourney can't make it. (Maybe they become sick, loved one passed away, maybe even themselves!,,,,etc....).

Also, are the top three finishers in the first tourney prohibited from playing in the second or third tourneys? I would think that they should be that way more people can try to get a seat at the final nine table.

The winner should wear a BYOC hat at the final table too!

 

[Quads]

That's what I'm thinking. I'd like to do three tourneys and a prior winner can certainly play, but they would max out on the final table tourney after winning two. They could possibly win up to two satellites towards the final table satellite.

If someone were to win two, then the final table would be 8 players and the percentages adjusted accordingly. This would again be capped at 2 wins and a max % of the table share.

If we did 3 tourneys @ $100, that would be 30 ppl. For a total of $3,000 in tourney winnings at the final. This ($3,000) would be the target number to get to. We can event expand it, in that if we get to $3,000 versus $1,500 then the winner could play 2 different $1,500 WSOP events.

If $100 were too steep for everyone, then we could do $50 at 6, but my preference would be 3, possibly 4 depending on peoples response and ideas. Our group participation is what would make this work well.

I would want to cap the total payout for the final WSOP satellite for a $2,500 WSOP event entry. If there were $3,000 in the pool from our satellites, then either send the winner down with some extra cash, or pay out the top 3 of the final with the extra cash.

Yes, all of the details and possible contingencies would be worked out UP FRONT so that what ever happened, there would be a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th plan if needed. Should the winner not play the WSOP event of choice.

The exact payouts and percentages, rules, details, possible issues, etc. etc. etc. of course need to be flushed out, but I thought a thread would at least get the idea started to see if we can get this off the ground.

 

[Hagar]

It seems to me that we got well past page 2 last year, but no need to go there. I'll express some contructive thoughts regarding your plan and let you go from there...

1. Do you really think that you could get 3 full tourneys with 20 players each @ $100/seat? You might be able to scrape 20 players together once, but I think you'd have trouble getting 60 seats filled even with the handfull that may play in multiple satelites.

2. You're paying the winner of each tourney a $1500 WSOP entry? ~$300 to 2nd, ~$200 to third. What's left in the kitty for the final 9 to play for? Or are you discussing two different concepts?

3. I must say that I like the idea of sending someone to the WSOP with the concept that all of the 9 finalists get a share of anything our rep brings home. Makes it a real team BYOC thing. Of course it's a long shot that any of us would money in any of the WSOP events (it's a long shot for even the top pros to money), but it's still a great concept. (It would probably be a better "investment" if were to just pool money and send one of our better tourney players, rather than the player who happens to do well in a couple of satelite events, but that's a different scheme all together.)

4. I'd suggest that for something this "important" we'd have a very "slow moving" tourney structure (big stacks/slow blind progression/"longer" blind levels) to let everyone get their money's worth.

Don't know for sure that I'd play (depends on how things are going at the time), but I'd certainly support the concept - run the tourney or deal - if I didn't play. All about the team.

 

[Quads]

It seems to me that we got well past page 2 last year, but no need to go there. I'll express some contructive thoughts regarding your plan and let you go from there...

1. Do you really think that you could get 3 full tourneys with 20 players each @ $100/seat? You might be able to scrape 20 players together once, but I think you'd have trouble getting 60 seats filled even with the handfull that may play in multiple satelites.

Yes, I think it can happen if there is the interest. But there is plan "B" which would be more likely. 3 or 4 slightly smaller tourneys (full table) at $50 to $75 to build the final table. What ever the math works out to be once we figure out what the buy in would be.

2. You're paying the winner of each tourney a $1500 WSOP entry? ~$300 to 2nd, ~$200 to third. What's left in the kitty for the final 9 to play for? Or are you discussing two different concepts?

No, all of the satellite money would roll over into the main tourney to build the pool for the WSOP entry. My initial idea would be what ever is in the kitty would pay first their WSOP entry, (what ever that amount is, $1500 or $2500) and then what is left over would be paid to the rest of that final table on a standard payout structure. 9th would see very little, (in perspective, perhaps a little more than even money, but gets a cut on the WSOP action)

3. I must say that I like the idea of sending someone to the WSOP with the concept that all of the 9 finalists get a share of anything our rep brings home. Makes it a real team BYOC thing. Of course it's a long shot that any of us would money in any of the WSOP events (it's a long shot for even the top pros to money), but it's still a great concept. (It would probably be a better "investment" if were to just pool money and send one of our better tourney players, rather than the player who happens to do well in a couple of satelite events, but that's a different scheme all together.)

I don't think it's a long shot at all. Look at last years runner up, Danennmenn, home game player, made some great moves, caught a few cards and went heads up for the main event. Look at Kanter, there is a long list of home players that cashed last year. I think there are several players in our group that could easily make the cash of a smaller WSOP event. I also know that you and I feel much differently about tourneys where I see the skill / luck to be in the 70/30% range and you see it differently (reverse numbers).

4. I'd suggest that for something this "important" we'd have a very "slow moving" tourney structure (big stacks/slow blind progression/"longer" blind levels) to let everyone get their money's worth.

Agreed. But each satellite still won't run 6 hours. If we end up doing 4 or 5 satellites, of 9 or 10 players each, I'd stick to something that we are used to as far as starting blinds, semi relaxed structure, etc. The final 9 players would be something that would the longer version with larger starting stacks.

Don't know for sure that I'd play (depends on how things are going at the time), but I'd certainly support the concept - run the tourney or deal - if I didn't play. All about the team.

All the support from the group the better, players or not.

 

[Ender]

Yeah, I'd be down for a 10 person, $125. That'd be enough to send the winner (remember the entry fee), and then depending on what place you finish in the satellite, we'd have a written agreement on how much you get. For instance:

10 players

1st - WSOP bound, and gets say %40 of any winnings (The Kid)
2nd - 20% of earnings (Quads)
3rd - 15% of earning (Hagar)
4th - 10% of earnings (Scooter)
5th - 5% of earnings. (Ace)
6th - 4%
7th - 2%
8th - 2%
9th - 1%
10th - 1%

Of course, that's just a rough outline, but you get the idea. We could skew the %'s into something agreed upon, but then everyone is playing for a small amount, even 10th. gets a couple hundred if our guy makes the $. The guys who wins should still get most of the $ that he makes, since it is his tourney after all.

We'd have to have a written contract, though, not that I don't trust anyone, but it'd just be safe to do so. Otherwise when I win the bracelet, I'll take the cool million and head south.

And no, I'm not splitting the bracelet 10 ways!

-kid

 

[Quads]

I kind of like the idea of several single table tourneys (say 3 or so), to build the final table, then the final table sends the winner to the WSOP.

 

[BigKahuna]

Basically like a shootout tourney.

 

[Quads]

Exactly.
I'm thinking 4 SnG's to build a pot of $2,500.
$75 to $100 entry for each Satellite

This would build the final table or 8 players.

If we did 4 satellites, then the top two finishers of each would roll to the final table. There would be no payout for the 4 satellites. They would simply race to the final table. The final table would be the 8 possible seats available. The winner of the final table goes to the WSOP and the 8 players would have a share in the WSOP winnings.

WSOP Winnings / Table Share
Entrant: 72%
Everyone else at the final table would get a % share in the WSOP winnings, should this person cash in the event. The higher you place in the final table, the greater your share.

2nd - 7%
3rd - 6%
4th - 5%
5th - 4%
6th - 3%
7th - 2%
8th - 1%

 

[Hagar]

***The following is submitted with the intention of expressing my opinion. In no way is my intent to try tell Quads "what he should do" or "how to run his tourney".***

If I was to organize something of this sort, where several "investors" are putting money into a pool, each with the oportunity of representing the group, I think I'd want to spread the return on that investment out a little better than 18% of possible winnings amongst 7 people.

The biggest real reward of winning the seat will be the "experience" of playing in the WSOP event. Regardless of your personal stance on how much tournies are skill/luck, you have to admit that winning any tourney - let alone a big one - requires a lot of (let's just call it) "being in the right place at the right time" mojo. It's a very long shot for anybody, not just us "home gamers", to finish in the money. Odds are very high that whoever goes to the event would bring back anything more than a few stories. Not trying to be a downer, just facing reality.

With that in mind, it wouldn't even be an awful result to have any money brought back to be split evenly amongst the 8 "investors" (the final satelite players). Let's put it this way: if you were to offer me a seat in an event for one 40th the cost under the condition that I have to split any winnings 8 ways, I'd do it in a heart beat - that's quite a good deal and that's effectively what having an 8 way split of any money won would represent. (40 players each put in a share, 8 players play for the right to represent.)

Given the fact that the rep would be doing "all the work", I'd have no problem with the winner getting a bigger share and having a tiered payoff for the other 7 final tablist (insentive to play well as opposed to just gamble it up early on). I'd propose something along the lines of this:

Winner: 50% share
Rest of table: split up the other 50% in some tiered fashion with the 8th place player getting at least 2.5% (which would represent the minimum investment share).

I could make an argument for the winner getting even a smaller cut, and better spread for the other 7, but I dond't want to drag this into a marathon post.

Again, no intention of "coming at anyone sideways", or trying to redirect another's event - just espressing my opinion.

 

[Dodger]

Scary, but I'm with Hagar on this one. The trip and 50% of the take is pretty sweet for a minimum investment among friends.

 

[Quads]

I'm trying to look at this a little differently than an investment package of a bunch of poker players. If that were the case, I'd give The Black Widow $1,500 buck and back her for 40% of the gravy.

I'm looking at this like a survival of the fittest within our group to send the best. Those that made the final table in this race of the survival of the fittest also get a little cut on the action to possibly see a little juice from it, should the winner of our satellites cash in the event.

It's perhaps not a ton of money, but more for a little fun action and bragging rights for whom ever goes.