You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
That needs some thought, Uncle Pom.
As I discussed in e-Mails with Marky, I want to avoid the heavy admin that goes with lots of requests from me to the Office for Free Entries. Think you won 5 x £11 entries, which would translate to 10 x £5 entries, & that means 10 requests from me to the Office, which all need manually inputting.
In a way, it'd be far easier if you took a Main Event entry as part of your prize, but of course the idea was to give the entries to the O8 MTT's.
I'll need to have a think on this one mate. I really do want to avoid sending up Free Entry requests every day if I can help it, as the guys in the office get a bit tired of all my bitting & bobbing requests.
The value of your prizes is, of course, unchanged.
A semi-quick statistical test like an Analysis of variance test and stepwise regression may indicate if the buy in level and/or time of the tourney were the significant factors. It may also indicate percentage wise how much the time and/or buy ins were responsible and help give an idea of where guarantees could be set.
I don't have the raw data and haven't been asked so haven't done this. I would guess timing and buy in level are very roughly equally to blame so would estimate the average number of entries in the new £5.50 would be around 42 with a deviation from the mean of around 10 either way so would estimate numbers would normally be between 32 and 52. This would mean missing the guarantee some nights and comfortably exceeding it on other nights, much the same as was the case in the £11.
We will obviously find out when the games start and the proof will be in the pudding. I hope they blitz the guarantee every single night as I would be very happy to have more PLO8 MTT's
I mentioned the new £5.50 should average around 42 runners and generally get between 32-52 runners, missing the guarantee some nights and not others. It has had 45 & 35 runners on the first 2 nights and missed the guarantee once and hit it once. If it was returned to an £11 £100 GTD it would have no trouble meeting this, not be a risk to Sky, and on most nights would completely smash this several fold.
Both the time and buy in are factors. In the same way it is harder to get higher numbers later in the evening; the converse will be true, a lower buy in £2.20 around 4 or 5:pm would get more runners than even the £5.50 @ 7:15pm and really help develop the player pool for OH8 generally (including for the 2 later MTT's).
None of this is a moan at Sky, it really really isn't. Sky have listened to the players on this one and been willing to try stuff out and support a little league. All brilliant stuff and a massive thanks to James, Tikay and Sky for this. It just looks clear from my personal perspective that if the £11 was left at £100 guarantee or increased slightly, and a £2.20 added to the massive gap in the PLO8 schedule around 4-5PM... We would very likely have 3 of them running, all crushing their guarantees, and have PLO8 players on the site a little earlier in the evening than usual.
If we had...
I would be willing to take on prop bets that they all hit their guarantee 95-99% of the time and eat my hat, run through the PLO8 DYM naked or whatever else if they failed in any way. Or not run through the PLO8 DYM lobby naked, whatever the preference would be
Which regs are going to play from 5pm to 11pm every night?
your efforts to get an £11 PL08 BH were great, and if it kept a low GT it may have grown.
its pretty difficult for most to start at 7-15 and still want to play at 9-15 which may go on till 12 ish, so they choose the cheaper earlier version.
instead of trying to fix the whole of sky PL08 schedule by changing stuff every other week, why not just keep the 5.5 BH or the 11 and leave it there. I for one was looking forward to the £11's this week.
if you start an earlier 2.20, numbers in the 5.5 will drop.
if you look at thurs evenings, the 2x 1.1 and 2.2 get the biggest fields.
sorry to criticise, something good was started and its going wrong IMO.
Just for the record, Suzy, it was Sky that dropped the £10 in favour of £5, not Marky.
I'm not really sure that a £10 MTT with a £100 Guarantee is feasible tbh.
I'd be thrilled to bits if those 2 BH's were raging successes, even if it is at the expense of the DYM's.
I did try the £5er one night last week, but can't say I much enjoyed the experience, but that's just me.
And the PLO8 DYM's have, inevitably suffered a bit, but that's no big deal, I can always jump across to the NLH DYM's now if the O8 traffic is light. I'd prefer not to, but we all like different things, & I'm cool with it.
For the record, adding a low buy in around teatime wouldn't be hoping to attract the same players and have them playing all night. That is the point of the suggestion. Many who have indicated they would play a low buy in one are different players.
I didn't just pull numbers out my £$%^ regarding possible entry numbers for the £2.20 either. It was projected figures used based upon the entry numbers for other games. You/anyone can tell me to shove my figures where the sun doesn't shine but they have proven to be bang on the money in regards to the new £5.50 MTT if you scroll back through the posts.
I did also mention several times here and elsewhere that the £11 MTT guarantee looked a tad high with little margin for error.
Anyways, entirely Sky's choice who they do or do not listen to and again thanks to Sky for trying to help the ploppers. I may have a different take on the exact implementation in my personal opinion but Sky have been attemtpting to help the ploppers with regards to the MTT schedule and I fully appreciate this!
is it ok to comment?
great work by scouse and marky.
i see the problem being that (please don't be offended ploppers) you are the very people who shouldn't determine the scheme. you are already deeply involved.
you need to attract new people. unfortunately, the league points are counter-productive. newbies will be put off trying to understand it all. you have also designed a scoring system that rewards regular players rather than sporadic and inquisitive newbie play.
some will know the scoring system i prefer, but even that is not simple enough for your purpose. i would suggest a simple 3, 2, 1 points for 1st, 2nd and 3rd. this way someone could have a chance of prizes without a commitment to play several games. it also means that someone could join in late in the week and know they have a chance.
turkeys at christmas for everyone.
ps i only post to help.
thanks chris.
to me, there are two fundamental problems; scoring so many places and the 10 entry bit.
look at a different sport. supposing we wanted people to take up darts. we would want a system that is simple, easily understood, might be winnable by a few lucky darts gives newbies an early thrill.
the regulars might choose to forego this system (despite giving them an improved chance of winning the incentive prizes) in favour of deliberately giving newbies the advantage.
It is obviously utterly up to Sky what tourneys do and do not take place here. As I created the opening post with the suggestion, a few of the comments have came in my direction. Due to this and the fact myself and Chris have been trying to get the league off the ground, as Sky generously funded it, I will give my take on things after this post for whatever it is or is not worth. It is then obviously completely up to Sky and the players to decide if they have any merit.
I personally feel a few points have been overlooked. Basically some new PLO8 MTT's have been introduced which have had over 240 unique players (if I read Chris's update in the other thread correctly) just since the start of the league.
Sky didn't have to introduce these, nor did they have to listen to feedback here, but they have. Furthermore they have been generous enough to offer a prizepool for a little league!
Have we found the correct recipe for these tourneys or the league yet? IMO, no! I think that is where the problem is though, there were no bounty hunter OH8 games here before. Therefore how many entries they would attract, the effect they would have on DYM's, etc were all guess work.
It is quite easy to say these tourneys are not great because of x,y or z. At the end of the day if they are compared to the bog standard PLO8 MTT's currently on the schedule... the bounty hunters are more popular based on the entry numbers (If you compare like for like such as the £5 PLO8 to the £5 PLO8 BH).
When the £11 tourney was introduced it attracted 3x and 4x the number of entrants needed to meet the guarantee. A new guarantee was then introduced based on these initial entry numbers. The problem is that some people would just be trying them out, some would continue to play them and some would not, numbers were always likely to fall a touch.
Tikay mentioned that a £100 GTD may not be feasible, if this is the case that is obviously completely fine. I do notice the £5.50 is £100 GTD though? Also the suggestion of having it set that low was just so there is absolutely no issue with meeting the guarantee. If the the 9:15pm game was an £11 buy in with a £200 guarantee I dont think it would ever have missed it? £300 just seemed very close to the margins.
I never wanted to change these 2 tourneys much. I think the only changes I suggested to these specific tourneys were very marginally extending late reg so that people could register during the break and to marginally lower the guarantee so there was a little comfort zone. As I had made the suggestion and also would love to see more OH8 games on the site that do well, I would have rather seen the tourney comfortably make a £200 GTD every night, rather than see it try to scrape a £300 guarantee and fall a little short some nights.
If we had a...
7:15pm £150-£200 GTD £5.50 PLO8 BH
9:15pm £200 GTD £11 PLO8 BH
I doubt we would have much problems in relation to guarantees, not in the forseeable future at least. They could hopefully be left to establish and it could be taken from there.
Would these suit everyone? No, absolutely not. Some people would hate them and some would like them. Much the same as some people like turbos, some like Hyper turbos and some people like regular games. There is no way to please everyone, it just is not possible, they can only really be judged on how many people indicate they like them by way of entering the games. The indications from the entry numbers are that a decent amount of people are happy to play them.
Regarding the league...
In the very first paragraph it was wrote "Please be patient if there are small kinks to be ironed out, this is the first month of the league so things may need a little bit of tweaking". Things were just put together to get the league up and running quickly, nothing was set in stone, everything was subject to change and feedback was/is very welcome. There would probably be no scoring system that everyone would love but any discussions with Chris were based on the feedback from the thread and aimed at getting as much consensus as possible between all the different viewpoints. Would we get a system that everyone thought was brilliant? I highly doubt it but the motives were to please as many players as possible.
Regarding the above motives and hopefully so everyone understands what my motives are... I hadn't mentioned this to Tikay yet as I did not want to be presumtious but if I was lucky enough to win any prizes I intended to ask Tikay if it would be possible (and would help reduce admin) to set up a little PLO8 freeroll and pay out tickets to the tourneys as prizes. If the league and tourneys should continue and it is possible to do this I would be happy for any prize I ever won to go out in free entries via a PLO8 freeroll to help promote the game and the tourneys. I certainly don't have an agenda to set up a league in a way which makes it overly easy for someone who plays a lot like myself to win.
Sorry for the long winded ramble but I am not the most succinct and there were a few points that have came up.
In short and all just my opinion...
The new BH's have attracted loads of unique players which is great.
Sky have been brilliant in implementing and supporting these when they did not have to.
There has been tons of player feedback which is brilliant.
The £300 guarantee for the £11 @ 9:15 just seemed a bit close to the margins and a £200 would probably work much much better.
The league prize system and scoring system are not perfect. In fairness though nobody had claimed they were yet. The league was set up quickly so it could be started for February and was always going to be changed so it was acceptable to as many players as possible.
IF we run for a second month... Hendrik made a good suggestion that may address some of the concerns raised and help maintain an element of interest for everyone who takes part in the games. It would affect other areas of the set up so I will message Chris later today and ask his thoughts on it.
I don't know the numbers for the 9:15pm £5er last night as I wasn't around here at the time but it looks like the new £5er @ 9:15pm may struggle. Is there any way we could have this returned to the £11 buy in with a £200 GTD instead of £300 so we can hopefully move forward with a little bit less uncertainty? I don't think on any night it ran it would have missed a £200 GTD and we were starting to see some of the Hold Em players like lmfaoallin and ChickNmelt join in now and again.