"Equal Distribution" tournament format
- Thread starter jbayx
- Start date
"Equal Distribution" has a wide range of benefits and I think the pool community will welcome it with open arms. It is not only recreational players who benefit. This format improves the game for everyone. The concept not only allows players with larger bankrolls the chance to play in a tournament with huge guarantees, it also allows players with smaller bankrolls play in tournaments where their idols are competing. Many pool players wish they could play against the likes of Archer, Van Boening or Strickland but to do so they would have to buy into tournaments with a buy-in of $200 - $500. With this format they will be able to rub shoulders with their heroes for a much smaller investment.
As you can see, the possibilities for this format are endless, and it offers pros a better chance to cash (although they will have to pay more) without giving them an edge like reentry tournaments offer.
As you can see, the possibilities for this format are endless, and it offers pros a better chance to cash (although they will have to pay more) without giving them an edge like reentry tournaments offer.
i like the initial idea,but does the money for the payouts add up right,you have 6200 to pay out,and if all tier one peeps win you pay it all out ,but if tier two or three peeps win say 2nd and 3rd the left over money for the lesser payout would carry over to the next tournament right. If it was a weekly tournament it would be great, and a good payout,but if not who would be responsible to keep the leftover monies for the next tournament. I have seen too Many TD suddenly take the money and run,or it magically disappears. I could never understand why peeps wont pay $50 to get into a weekly tournament but they will pay a $10 or $15 entry spend 10-20 dollars in a break pot and 30 in a calcutta, when you addit all up they have over $50 invested,it makes no sense. We had a guy who handicapped his tournament by the amount you paid to get in, which i thought was crazy, but after you think about it it isnt too bad. Everyone started out paying $8 a week, then the person that won would have to pay $16 the next week,while everyone else paid $8. If he won again the next week he would pay $24, each time you won you had to pay $8 more the next week, until you topped out at $40 or something. That way the lesser players got into the tournament for a cheaper amount then the better players and didnt have as much to risk. This was a weekly tournament mind you, and after 6 months time,everyone would start over. Kind of different but we never did it for 6 months, the tournament broke up because of new ownership. We did have several that were topped out so it wasnt the same guy winning every week, plus it did fatten the tournament pot a little bit. I think the best way to run a handicapped tournament is to seperate the skill levels with different brackets, say apa 4s and 5s in their own bracket, and 6s and 7s in their own bracket, then in the finals they meat up, that way a lower skill level is guarateed to get into the money. You can handicap by games in each bracket, maybe just by giving up the first break to the lesser player. If the brackets are very uneven, you can have the best 5s move to the upper bracket with the 6and 7s to even the brackets out, or just play with buys and have the littler bracket done sooner and waiting on the bigger bracket, or have longer races in the smaller bracket or shorter in the big bracket, lots of ways to make things better,i just wish our local guy would listen,its like talking to the wall.
I agree
Lew i agree with you , i would love to see a weekly 50 dollar entry tournement
The trouble at least around where i live is when you raise the enrty fee to 20 bucks or more, the complaints can be heard for a mile. your local bangers are screaming its not fair because now the tournement is drawing better players and they cant win
not that they were winning at 10 dollars
Lew i agree with you , i would love to see a weekly 50 dollar entry tournement
The trouble at least around where i live is when you raise the enrty fee to 20 bucks or more, the complaints can be heard for a mile. your local bangers are screaming its not fair because now the tournement is drawing better players and they cant win
not that they were winning at 10 dollars
"Equal Distribution" has a wide range of benefits and I think the pool community will welcome it with open arms. It is not only recreational players who benefit. This format improves the game for everyone. The concept not only allows players with larger bankrolls the chance to play in a tournament with huge guarantees, it also allows players with smaller bankrolls play in tournaments where their idols are competing. Many pool players wish they could play against the likes of Archer, Van Boening or Strickland but to do so they would have to buy into tournaments with a buy-in of $200 - $500. With this format they will be able to rub shoulders with their heroes for a much smaller investment.
As you can see, the possibilities for this format are endless, and it offers pros a better chance to cash (although they will have to pay more) without giving them an edge like reentry tournaments offer.
As you can see, the possibilities for this format are endless, and it offers pros a better chance to cash (although they will have to pay more) without giving them an edge like reentry tournaments offer.
I think it's a great idea, though in many markets, you might be looking at entry fees of $10, $20, and $50.
The way to make the math balance out is to have a state-contingent payoff matrix and pay all the way down until the money is exhausted. So the better the tier 2 and tier 3 players do, the deeper the payouts go. That could make some of the finals exciting for everyone!
You would have to build a spreadsheet, pretty easy in Excel, that takes as inputs the entry fees for the three tiers and the number of players in each tier. That gives the total pot. The deepest payout would occur if only Tier 3 players won; the shallowest would be if only Tier 1 players win.
One difficulty is that some players wouldn't know their winnings until the tourney is over.
The way to make the math balance out is to have a state-contingent payoff matrix and pay all the way down until the money is exhausted. So the better the tier 2 and tier 3 players do, the deeper the payouts go. That could make some of the finals exciting for everyone!
You would have to build a spreadsheet, pretty easy in Excel, that takes as inputs the entry fees for the three tiers and the number of players in each tier. That gives the total pot. The deepest payout would occur if only Tier 3 players won; the shallowest would be if only Tier 1 players win.
One difficulty is that some players wouldn't know their winnings until the tourney is over.
Interesting idea.
One concern, especially with the relatively large entries/payouts you seem to advocate, is a first-tier and third-tier player in the finals doing "business" of some sort....
Maybe I haven't had enough coffee this morning, but if the 3rd tier ($60) entry can only win $ from that tier, wouldn't it only be $1200 in the pool, not $3600? 20 entries x $60 = $1200. Did I miss something?
Diamond69,
...the sponsor for this format? to answer your question.
At first glance of the original post, I started reading up from the bottom to the third tier, adding up the payout, thinking, where is the profit, the incentive to promote, produce such a touring event? Then you came along with your math, I haven't finish my first cup yet, so far, I can only think of the sponsor that has not received any recognition for this format - then,
there is the date that this thread was started, things have transformed a bit since then.
Could pool be considered therapy, qualifying for Obamacare - the sponsor at the least? They have all the money.
...the sponsor for this format? to answer your question.
At first glance of the original post, I started reading up from the bottom to the third tier, adding up the payout, thinking, where is the profit, the incentive to promote, produce such a touring event? Then you came along with your math, I haven't finish my first cup yet, so far, I can only think of the sponsor that has not received any recognition for this format - then,
there is the date that this thread was started, things have transformed a bit since then.
Could pool be considered therapy, qualifying for Obamacare - the sponsor at the least? They have all the money.
from a statistical standpoint it makes no difference to anybody
you bring in x amount and pay out x amount, those variables once set do not change and as such ,all things being equal, the probabilities in relation to payout percentages remain exactly the same
now from a promotional standpoint things change, fields tend to grown when the payouts are deep and less top heavy
personally I'm a fan of minimal entry fees and top heavy payouts....and handicapped tourneys
probably not the norm
i think the idea in question though as it promotes where tourneys need to move to so good there
............, i.e. more accessible for weaker players while maintaining accesibility for pros who dont/can't navigate a huge field while handicapped
having said that, I've never really felt fees vs payouts was much of an issue in pool (see my first point)
for me, it's always been about lack of promotion and lack of handicapping
you bring in x amount and pay out x amount, those variables once set do not change and as such ,all things being equal, the probabilities in relation to payout percentages remain exactly the same
now from a promotional standpoint things change, fields tend to grown when the payouts are deep and less top heavy
personally I'm a fan of minimal entry fees and top heavy payouts....and handicapped tourneys
probably not the norm
i think the idea in question though as it promotes where tourneys need to move to so good there
............, i.e. more accessible for weaker players while maintaining accesibility for pros who dont/can't navigate a huge field while handicapped
having said that, I've never really felt fees vs payouts was much of an issue in pool (see my first point)
for me, it's always been about lack of promotion and lack of handicapping
IF you find it...send word
Ive spent a lot of time and thought on tournament formats but not as much on payout formats but if you find something that makes pool players happy send word. I would sure like to hear it but I will guarantee that will likely not be found. I got to the point where I knew there wasn't anything so my thinking was if I can organize it and play in it, then why do I want to do it?
Ive spent a lot of time and thought on tournament formats but not as much on payout formats but if you find something that makes pool players happy send word. I would sure like to hear it but I will guarantee that will likely not be found. I got to the point where I knew there wasn't anything so my thinking was if I can organize it and play in it, then why do I want to do it?
I think the OPs idea is great. Bottom line is that most pool players like to gamble, this is very obvious at even small tournaments during the calcutta. We did the same multi level entry fee when I was racing. IE. winner would get $10k for $300.00 entry or you could pay a smaller $150.00 entry fee for a $5k win. I also do not think that the payouts are too biased at the top. The winner should get a large share of the pot with runner up winning 50% of winner's share.
At a local tournament here that runs every Friday the higher the player rating the more they pay.
I believe 2-3's pay $20, 4-5's pay $30 and 6-7's pay $40. Ratings are based on MO8 ratings. Race to 3 with with higher levels needing to win extra games for level difference. I personally think it should go the opposite way so that lower levels have to win less games as the odds decrease of you winning any games as your opponent's level increases.
I believe 2-3's pay $20, 4-5's pay $30 and 6-7's pay $40. Ratings are based on MO8 ratings. Race to 3 with with higher levels needing to win extra games for level difference. I personally think it should go the opposite way so that lower levels have to win less games as the odds decrease of you winning any games as your opponent's level increases.
Agreed. Even with a handicap system in place, the local (60 miles away) Saturday 9-Ball tournament with $10 entry is almost always won by a member of the very small group of upper-tier players who carry no handicap. So in that sense it feels like being in a ring game, with the semi-pros always walking away with everyone else's cash, no matter who has what handicap.
So no amount of handicap gets a player into the final four - and usually the same holds true for the final eight places. If someone with a handicap wins much of the pot, it is because they have improved so much that their handicap ranking is no longer correct.
Sometimes I don't mind donating, it's only ten bucks after all, and it's a nice way to spend a Saturday afternoon. Then there is the fun and experience of playing against better players... but deep down I am thinking here I am donating to the same bunch of guys that I would never gamble with if they just came out and offered me a spot equal to my tournament 'handicap'.
The end result is that anyone playing in a pool tournament for the prize money better have a day job, or a backer, or a wife with a day job, or enough skill to always finish near the top... you get the idea - SVB, Efren, Orcollo, that bunch.
Last edited:
