This is a discussion on Re: Todd McGee, Retiring Omaha within the online poker forums, in the General Poker section; After reading your latest blog, Todd, I'm starting to get an idea why we have such a hard time disagreeing with each other--even when we
After reading your latest blog, Todd, I'm starting to get an idea why we have such a hard time disagreeing with each other--even when we try for the sake of entertainment value. If we both think poker should be exciting and action packed, then there's really going to be more that we agree on than disagree.
So, this post is less a rebuttal of your post and more a request of expansion of the idea. I'd like to know, what do you think of shootouts? The excitement value of bounty tournaments is obvious, but I think having more than just one or two shootout events would add a lot of excitement as well. I mean, one table, 9-10 players enter, just one leaves with their tournament life? Talk about being able to cut the tension with a knife, right? And tension very much helps create excitement.
For that matter, why are all shootouts winner take all anyway? I could see an event with 9 players to a table, but the final 3 remaining advance instead of just the winner. It's mathematically sound at the least.
And please, if your name isn't Todd McGee don't think that just because I'm addressing this mainly to him that you're not welcome to share your own opinion on this!
23rd November 2016, 3:40 PM
Poker at: ACR
I like shootouts. I've played them online before but never live. Omaha on-line is fine because it moves so much quicker, but a live Omaha tourney is the pits. Each hand takes 5 minutes to play, and then if it's a Hi-Low tourney with a split pot, it takes another 2-3 minutes for the dealer to split the pot and then shuffle up and deal the next hand. About as exciting as watching paint dry. I just want the Circuit folks to pay attention and start scheduling more bounty tourneys and less Omaha events. Attendance for the Omaha tourneys is abysmal.