ACR 8-handed MTT payouts

[Alizona]

Does it annoy anyone else that ACR runs a ton of 8-handed MTT's, but they still use the 9-handed payout tables?

It's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen on a poker site. There's a pay jump with 9 players left, for example... because at 9-handed, the final table obviously begins with 9 players left. However, with an 8-handed tournament, the pay jump occurs when you have one table at 5-handed and the other table at 4-handed... talk about stupidity...

And this continues all the way down the ladder on payouts. With 18 players left, there's a pay jump... that one isn't so terrible (3 tables of 6 players each), but the pay jump should obviously occur with 16 players left.

With 27 players left, there's a pay jump, but the tables are 7,7,7 and 6. Again, this pay jump should occur at 24 players left, 3 full tables of 8 players.

I mean, how hard could it be for ACR to draft up an 8-handed payout table for MTT's? This has been going on for months now, and it is utter stupidity.

I suppose it doesn't bother others in the same way that it bothers me, perhaps it's just one of my pet peeves, but I hate ACR's lackadaisical attitude especially when it seems they are running more 8-handed tournaments than 9-handed ones now. Dumb, dumb, dumb!!!

 

[fundiver199]

I think, the vast majority of players expect, that arriving at the final table should be associated with a small payjump. And with even numbers like 8-max, 6-max or 4-max that leads to a final table bubble with uneven number of players at each table. Which in my opinion is not that big of a deal, since it levels out in the long run, and the payjump is never an important one. Its more a psycological thing, where many people see it as an achievement to reach the final table.

pokerstars have solved it though by letting the final table begin with one more player. In a 4-max on PokerStars, the final table begin with 5 players, in a 6-max it begin with 7 players and in a 8-max it begin with 9 players. Unlike for instance 888 Poker they have also constructed the payouts, so the bubble and each payjump occur in a situation, where the tables have equally many players. So rather than having a bubble or payjump at 27 in a 9-max tournament, as 888 Poker does, on PokerStars its at 26. And so on and so forth.

 

[Alizona]

I think, the vast majority of players expect, that arriving at the final table should be associated with a small payjump. And with even numbers like 8-max, 6-max or 4-max that leads to a final table bubble with uneven number of players at each table. Which in my opinion is not that big of a deal, since it levels out in the long run, and the payjump is never an important one. Its more a psychological thing, where many people see it as an achievement to reach the final table.

Yes that is entirely fair, I do agree that I am nitpicking here and that pay jumps really shouldn't ever matter to us (prior to the final table where ICM becomes very important)... we should be entirely focused on winning, not on laddering up. Totally agree with that take.

However, I still claim it is laziness on the part of ACR to not draw up an 8-handed payout table to go along with the 9-handed payout table already being used. How hard can it be for them to do that? It is trivially easy.

Anyhow, thanks for taking the time to reply.

 

[Emily Trott]

I've never really thought about that before now, and it is a very interesting question. To me nine players is nine players so it really doesn't matter, and might even be a plus for those at the two short handed tables since they have to pay more antes.

 

[Alizona]

I've never really thought about that before now, and it is a very interesting question. To me nine players is nine players so it really doesn't matter, and might even be a plus for those at the two short handed tables since they have to pay more antes.

Thanks, that is an interesting point you've raised in return, perhaps that's why ACR is in no hurry to change things. Appreciate the reply.

 

[1984]

Thanks, that is an interesting point you've raised in return, perhaps that's why ACR is in no hurry to change things. Appreciate the reply.

Other rooms sort this thing out differently, GG, party, especially can talk about party p, the 8max tourneys have 9 ring FTs, the 6max ones have 7max FTs, and i think the 7max tourneys - as they have plenty, i just dont force them much - have 8max FTs, you see the pattern.

And generally the hole payout structure compare to WPN is totally different. Early ITM they have less pay jumps until the last 4-6 tables usually, then it starts to go up after every relegated table. WPN i think still have the 10-12+ tables when the pay raise appears more often, after 8-9 players (a table) relegated. So an FT, especially top3 much more valuable on party.

Personally, adding 1+ seat to FT, i think a very good idea. About the payout structure, in long run, it doesn't make such a huge difference.

 

[BIGAUS]

A pet peeve for sure that I share when it appears there are more and more 8-handed MTTs. Because of it, I do sometimes have to alter my strategy just slightly to be aware of these odd pay jumps and if I'm potentially at a disadvantage if I'm at a table with fewer players and blinds coming around more quickly.

 

[Ice Wolf]

ACR has shown us time and again they are full of people who aren't the brightest. This is dumb, the ticket system to see players at a ring game and then not be able to play on that table for seven hours might have this one beat. The entire reason they give for hiding a players name in the ring games to start with should set off HUGE alarms to anyone with the ability to think. In the past they have taken away the decision to show your cards, for some odd reason they don't allow you to see the HH for the last hand that KO'd you in a tourney without taking 20 minutes to hunt through all your previous tourneys. Don't get me started on the NG. WPN and it's management is a joke.

 

[coolbrees 9]

I prefer 8max tournaments less high pair vs high pair and I feel like I can do better in these games. Most annoying thing is to build a stack and lose alot on qq vs kk or kk vs AA try to keep pot small but not possible all the time!

 

[I Live Poker]

Does it annoy anyone else that ACR runs a ton of 8-handed MTT's, but they still use the 9-handed payout tables?

It's one of the dumbest things I've ever seen on a poker site. There's a pay jump with 9 players left, for example... because at 9-handed, the final table obviously begins with 9 players left. However, with an 8-handed tournament, the pay jump occurs when you have one table at 5-handed and the other table at 4-handed... talk about stupidity...

And this continues all the way down the ladder on payouts. With 18 players left, there's a pay jump... that one isn't so terrible (3 tables of 6 players each), but the pay jump should obviously occur with 16 players left.

With 27 players left, there's a pay jump, but the tables are 7,7,7 and 6. Again, this pay jump should occur at 24 players left, 3 full tables of 8 players.

I mean, how hard could it be for ACR to draft up an 8-handed payout table for MTT's? This has been going on for months now, and it is utter stupidity.

I suppose it doesn't bother others in the same way that it bothers me, perhaps it's just one of my pet peeves, but I hate ACR's lackadaisical attitude especially when it seems they are running more 8-handed tournaments than 9-handed ones now. Dumb, dumb, dumb!!!

hahaha I had already noticed that, but it doesn't bother me so much and it doesn't influence my decisions at all, but each one has a reaction. This is one of the symptoms of touch. Just kidding,
they could adjust that yes, but we don't know what the programmatic obstacles are for such action so maybe it's too much work for something that's irrelevant.

 

[fundiver199]

Actually ACR also use the same payout structure designed for 9-max MTTs in their 6-max MTTs. This is rather awkward, because its means, that there are payjumps with 10, 9, 8 and 7 people left, even though there are still two tables running. With 7 left there is hand for hand play, but what is the difference, when there were also payjumps at 10, 9 and 8 players? Not exactly a deal breaker for me, but certainly not well thought through either