The perfect mtt?

Thinking about this earlier, wanted to run it past everyone.
How would this work as a mtt?
Buy-in is a week's wages, for anyone and everyone.
Maximum amount of players=100
Payout=final table
Final table payout=2nd to 9th 5% of pool. 1st=50%.Absolutley no deals/chops. 10% to charity.
Starting stack 10000 chips
blinds 25/50
levels up every hour

Ok, buy-in. Poker pro's? Maybe £1million a week? Average guy in uk? £500* a week. Actors? Average per week? £500,000.
Reasoning, you're risking your own money, and a week's wages at that. That would put everyone on a level playing field. Helmuth entering the wsop ME with a $10,000 buy-in(not that he pays, lol, but if he did) thats like a $1 mtt to me, probably even less. I'd like to see the pros play pure poker when the stakes are high, in relation to their earnings.

Final table payout only? well, everyone's gunning for the final table, so better play before it. Same payout for 2nd to 9th? Once you hit that final table, then everyone would be playing for 1st, no folding to stay in and move up a cash place.

chips/blinds/levels? deepstack, and semi-long mtt.



Guess this could be adapted for ring, buy-in is one week's wages. Then everyone gets $1000 in chips to play with. blinds are 5/10. minimum table time for each player, 2 hours, after that leave whenever. Payout would be in relation to how many chips you have against total buy-in pool


Discuss? thoughts, etc?


*£1=$2 for this thread.



Copyright Kerouacsdog at CardsChat.com (just in case this gets nicked by a rival forum, lol)

KerouacsDog said:

Reasoning, you're risking your own money, and a week's wages at that. That would put everyone on a level playing field.

Copyright Kerouacsdog at CardsChat.com (just in case this gets nicked by a rival forum, lol)

Click to expand...

It would put the high-earners at a distinct disadvantage.

You get one pro putting in a large chunk of the prize pool with the potential of coming in first but winning less than his entry fee.

Equal buy-in for equal prize pool = level playing field.

Only if I can buy in in Jan or Feb, when my sales are equal to that of the 15 year old at McDonalds

kaiWalk said:

It would put the high-earners at a distinct disadvantage.

You get one pro putting in a large chunk of the prize pool with the potential of coming in first but winning less than his entry fee.

Equal buy-in for equal prize pool = level playing field.

Click to expand...

but long term, the playing field would be levelled, cause at the moment the pros dont care what the buy-in is, as its normally covered by their sponsorship/winnings, etc.
this would be about winning the tournament for them, not about the money(which it should never be, anyway)

KerouacsDog said:

this would be about winning the tournament for them, not about the money(which it should never be, anyway)

Click to expand...

Okay, I really don't understand that line of thinking. The whole point of playing poker is to make money - even for the pros. That's why I play - and I'm sure that the big name pros would switch professions in a hurry if they weren't making a decent living at poker.

^^^^ok, yeah, I get that. But this mtt is purely about bragging rights, a best in the world, if you like(field could be opened up to ME size I guess?)