All or nothing. Would you play?

[mtmigmike]

I wouldn't take part in such a tournament, the probability of winning it is too small, it's like playing the lottery.

 

[pavel1111111]

no thanks

 

[FrizzaoR]

Just when I want to test my luck haha

 

[Gallarado777]

if there were such rules, there would be much fewer players because players are lured with big winnings with small contributions and so gather a lot of people and make money on them everyone thinks that they are the winner and 90% of players lose every day

 

[moularaki]

Of course not if i have to put my money in
On the other hand, i will if it is a freeroll because i have nothing to loose

 

[Like2Play2]

No way, not interested. Finishing in the money is too much of a reward in tournament poker. You at least get a little something for your patience.

 

[najisami]

Not really. Would it worth it if you play a tremendous amount of time only to get knocked out 3rd or 2nd with $0 ?

 

[spectralwave]

It's very difficult for me to play with this probability, only in cases that force me or for a move to make my villain fold, but it's very relative, I like study more and not luck.

 

[daniel888]

I don't like that tournament, the variance is very high. Most of the time we play, we will get nothing.

 

[AlphaCentauro]

I’d say top 3 like olympics would be more fun, however, all or nothing seems logical in tournament too. Would clean up tournaments from people that are not committed for sure, would make more people quit poker tournament in a long run, hence better quality players would stick around. Better players is better for evolution of the sport.

 

[TeUnit]

Nope too rich for me.

 

[D0nk3y Hunt3r]

There is a reason behind most common today flat structure of payouts.

 

[Andrii Lubentsov]

On the contrary, I would like a larger percentage of players to enter the prizes. When one gets all this is not for me.

 

[SL-247]

Hello poker family!
I've got a pretty interesting topic to discuss.
We all know how poker prizes are distributed today. This is usually 20% of the total number of players, and the first place is taken by the player who wins all the chips in the tournament.
If you take any tournament, let it be Sunday Million — and change the generally accepted rules a little bit.
Now only 1 player will receive the entire pot, which is about $1,000,000. Everyone else gets nothing. Do you think you would play by these rules?

These are just my thoughts, nothing more) But I think I hardly took part in such a tournament.

Definitely not. This is a stupid idea.

 

[yuriko oyama]

I don't have the talent or the peace of mind to play a tournament like that.

 

[Poker Orifice]

I've played several winner take all events, they were fun.

I've also played a top 2 chop 50/50 and nobody else get paid MTT (which I won!).

Great but I don't think OP is talking about HeadsUp sng's.

 

[Pindiez]

Definitely not! I don’t like this type of tournament. In my opinion it is not real poker. I’m not interest play this tournament. 🙂

Sorry for my english 😬

 

[Andyreas]

I've played several winner take all events, they were fun.

I've also played a top 2 chop 50/50 and nobody else get paid MTT (which I won!).

Only pros like you can accept those kind of rules. 😱

But to be fair, I doubt that those tourneys have 1000s of participants.

 

[pokerD]

I don't like the idea at all. They are perfectly fine with cash prizes in their current form.

 

[ramdon p358]

Once Carlos Mortensen said that he didn't care if the whole prize went to the winner of the tournament, but I prefer tournaments where several players get prizes

 

[pltelles]

At ACR I play tournaments that only reward the top 3, it's hard but I've already won once (50% of the total prize pool).

 

[gustavofuentes2]

Hello poker family!
I have a rather interesting topic to discuss.
We all know how poker prizes are distributed today. Most often, this is 20% of the total number of players, and the first place is taken by the player who won all the chips in the tournament.
If you take any tournament, let it be the Sunday Million - and slightly change the generally accepted rules.
Now only 1 player will take the entire pot, which is about $1,000,000. Everyone else gets nothing. Do you think you would play by these rules?

These are just my thoughts, nothing more) But I think that I hardly took part in such a tournament.

no I would not play this kind of tournament unless its a freeroll

 

[jordanbillie]

Only pros like you can accept those kind of rules. 😱

But to be fair, I doubt that those tourneys have 1000s of participants.

I'm pretty sure way back in the day I tried a WTA MTT that had 500+ entrants, lol!

The top 2 paid MTT wasn't that long ago, but yeah it only had like 50 players or something. I'm curious now, I'm going to try to look it up.

 

[MK_]

I don't know... how many are playing, how good are they, what's the blind structure, is it a deep stack, what's the buyin, ... need more info lol!

 

[eberetta1]

I find myself seldom playing Cardschat $100 freeroll because only 4 players win and there are less than 50 players. So I definitely would not waste my time in the format of winner taker all for $1 million.

If it's a heads up tournament, yes, I would pay various entry fees for heads up tourneys.