"Equal Distribution" tournament format

J

jbayx

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
This past weekend i attended a reputable, handicapped, touring tournament that drew about 50 players. After three days of commuting and hard play i finished 5th. Not bad for a mediocre player! However, being a business owner, this does not make monetary sense... I will elaborate. $60 entry, $40 calcutta, $40 gas, $45 food and tip and over 40 hours of play and time away from my family, 5th place pays $100. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

Having said all of this, the money is not the primary reason i play pool... But for some, it is. The cut from the tournament was fair, the way it was orchestrated was smooth and the people involved in making the tournament happen were outstanding. After much thought, i have come to the realization that it is time to do away with the current way tournaments are funded. Here is a format i created in an attempt to change the current norm , i will call it "Equal Distribution"

Format

Entry fees $60, $100 and $150

Entrants can choose their own entry fee, Think of this like a multi line slot machine. Each coin (entry) activates a different pay out. You need the maximum coins to receive the largest jackpot. The machine will pay on cherries, bars and sevens. The sevens pay the most coins. If you play one coin ($60) you can collect only on the cherries. If you play two coins ($100) you can collect on cherries and bars. You need three coins inserted ($150) to collect on the sevens. The following format would encourage players to play with "maximum coins".

For the sake of argument, here is a simple example of the entrants and the payouts without money added or subtracted from an outside source.

(20) entrants have chosen to pay $150 (1st tier )
(20) entrants have chosen to pay $100 (2nd tier)
(20)entrants have chosen to pay $60 (3rd tier )

Total available prize fund for 1st tier players $6200
Total available prize fund for 2nd tier players $5200
Total available prize fund for 3rd tier players $3600


Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $150 entry fee

1st place $2400
2nd place $1200
3rd place $800
4th place $600
5th/6th $400 each
7th/8th $200 each

Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $100 entry fee

1st place $2200
2nd place $1000
3rd place $700
4th place $500
5th/6th $300 each
7th/8th $100 each

Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $60 entry fee

1st place $1400
2nd place $800
3rd place $500
4th place $400
5th/6th $200 each
7th/8th $50 each

Okay, now what happens if a lower tier places. For the sake of argument, here is another example.

1st place was a third tier player, they would win $1400
2nd place was a third tier player, they would win $800
3rd place was a 1st tier player, they would win $800
4th place was a 2nd tier player, they would win $500

And so on...



Inevitably there will be "extra" money left over from the the tournament after the payouts. This money should be dumped into the following tour stops 1st tier prize fund. The monetary growth of the the "jackpot" would be substantial from stop to stop and would encourage players to play with "maximum coins". This format, in my opinion, would work best in a handicapped tournament.

Your Thought?
 
Last edited:
I like it.

I think the most difficult thing about this format would be making sure the players understand how it works
 
I like the idea of paying different amounts to win more or less money.

That is a really cool idea.


What I don't like is your payout. It's like all pool tournaments. I don't think first place should be so top heavy. You said yourself you only got $100 for playing all those hours. My idea is to take away from first place and pay more down the line.

Okay...let the bashing begin.:smile:
 
Sounds good

But the first place needs to be smaller, like all tournaments the first lace is to high, the money should be paid further down into the field to keep everyone coming back
 
I do believe that it would take a little time to educate the players and directors on how the system works.

As far as the payouts go, one could look at it two ways.

A) The payouts being "top heavy" could possibly make the next stop on the tour a little more attractive because of the "extra money" that would carry over.

B)Because of the nature of the program, the tournament director would be able to customize the payouts as he/she sees fit and pay out a little further down the line. This could attract more players to the immediate tournament.

Also, most tournaments have money added from the room owner, sponsors, tournament director...This has not been calculated into the format, Most of the time it is a wash anyway.
 
It's sort of like you can place a sidebet on yourself. Interesting idea.

You'd have to be careful with the exact amounts to make sure it makes sense math-wise.

$60 to win $1400 is ~23 times your money.
$150 to win $2400 is only 16 times your money.

So the lowest tier entry fee is much more attractive.
Even the 2nd tier is better... who wants to pay an 50 more to win a max of an extra 200?

However after several events, with the 'leftover' money fattening up the purse...
eventually the upper tier might end up paying 3000 or so. Then we're looking at ~20x
your money and all three tiers are roughly even.

What about this?
guaranteed 20-to-1 payout for any given entry fee, but first place winner
gets a flat bonus of all the leftovers from the previous event.
This encourages higher tier entries and makes the first prize newsworthy.
 
I think with some adjustments it could work. It is definitely an interesting approach.

One thing that would probably need to be adjusted is the difference in the payouts between first and second tier. Even if I figure to finish 4th or better, I am not going to fire an extra $50 at the tournament for a potential $100-$200 in prize money.

Just noticed CreeDo beat me to it.

In short, there has to be something to entice players to pay tier one entries.

Aaron
 
Last edited:
CreeDo said:
What about this?
guaranteed 20-to-1 payout for any given entry fee, but first place winner
gets a flat bonus of all the leftovers from the previous event.
This encourages higher tier entries and makes the first prize newsworthy.
Click to expand...

I think if you just do a flat bonus for a tier 1 winner, say $500, that would entice players to hit tier 1. For 10:1 money odds, plus the difference in payout for 1st, I would fire the extra $50 at it.


BUT... people often get upset if payouts are top-heavy, and this would only make matters worse. Probably would have to adjust 1st place price money down, maybe to 10:1 or 15:1, and then add the $500 bonus.

Aaron
 
Last edited:
The hell with it all:) $50 buy in, races to 3, alternate break, rack your own, break from the center! Average B players to the semis, its a coin flip! The hell with handicapped tourneys! Think of how quick it would go! Also, you can start another same day! I understand the whole point of handicapped races, but do away from it, it leads to sandbagging! To those who are C players,,, you have a way better chance of winning a race to 3 than you think;) just my 2 pennies!
 
Also, the psychological part of playing a better player when they are are 1-0 race to 3 is pretty big in my opinion! If there are pros at the event, you have a vote right there with all the players voting if they want to let the pros play! Personally, if i was in a field like that, I wouldn't care if there are pros, I'm a B player, so I like the thought of beating a pro! But, with that said, I understand other players thoughts of having a pro play!
 
The hell with it all:) $50 buy in, races to 3, alternate break, rack your own, break from the center! Average B players to the semis, its a coin flip! The hell with handicapped tourneys! Think of how quick it would go! Also, you can start another same day! I understand the whole point of handicapped races, but do away from it, it leads to sandbagging! To those who are C players,,, you have a way better chance of winning a race to 3 than you think;) just my 2 pennies!
 
Pool "Tournaments" when more than 75% of the prize money is coming from the players, is nothing more than a gambling ring game designed to collect up the money from the lesser players and hand it over to the better players....I don't care how anyone looks at it otherwise. A world class players income is limited by the amount of contributions to the tournament system of earnings base on those that'll pay to play, and based on how much has to be paid overall. The consequences of this tournament/ring game system to pull in these contributors is to give them a shot at the possibility of makinf some money, or to beat a Pro during the event....by calling for shorter races, alternating breaks, different rules....or rule changes that they feel benefit their chances to win. And people wonder why there's no corporate sponsorship stepping up to supports this sport that has been so bastardized over the years;)

Glen
 
How about you format it like this.
Tier 1 $50 entry
Tier 2 $100 entry
Tier 3 $150 entry

Each tier payout for example:
$1500 $1000 $500

So if your in tier 3 and win you get all 3 first places...if you get 2nd and a guy in tier 2 wins you get 1st place money in tier 3 and 2nd place money in the other tiers....basically the top 3 highest finishers in tier 3 get paid out top tier money then top 3 finishers in tier 2 and 3 get paid tier 2 money....numbers and places paid are just for example would be adjusted accordingly....
 
How would this work out, if say,there were only two or three tier 3 entrants and one of them went two and out, the second one got put out on the second day and the third person finished just out of the money?

What i like about the "Equal Distribution" is that there is a chance that a good portion of the money will carry over to the next tournament. Also, as far as the entry fee goes, if i get there and don't like the field or not feeling well, i may choose to pay the lower entry fee. Or, if i feel good about my game and there is good amount of carry over i might go ahead and pay the $150 and take a shot at it. In my opinion, this is a crucial part of the format success.
 
Everybody gets a trophy 1St to the last all the same size. about 2 inches tall.
House keeps all the money for chopping off their regulars to have a tourny for outsiders.
Now this is fair for everyone.


bill
 
jbayx said:
This past weekend i attended a reputable, handicapped, touring tournament that drew about 50 players. After three days of commuting and hard play i finished 5th. Not bad for a mediocre player! However, being a business owner, this does not make monetary sense... I will elaborate. $60 entry, $40 calcutta, $40 gas, $45 food and tip and over 40 hours of play and time away from my family, 5th place pays $100. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

Having said all of this, the money is not the primary reason i play pool... But for some, it is. The cut from the tournament was fair, the way it was orchestrated was smooth and the people involved in making the tournament happen were outstanding. After much thought, i have come to the realization that it is time to do away with the current way tournaments are funded. Here is a format i created in an attempt to change the current norm , i will call it "Equal Distribution"

Format

Entry fees $60, $100 and $150

Entrants can choose their own entry fee, Think of this like a multi line slot machine. Each coin (entry) activates a different pay out. You need the maximum coins to receive the largest jackpot. The machine will pay on cherries, bars and sevens. The sevens pay the most coins. If you play one coin ($60) you can collect only on the cherries. If you play two coins ($100) you can collect on cherries and bars. You need three coins inserted ($150) to collect on the sevens. The following format would encourage players to play with "maximum coins".

For the sake of argument, here is a simple example of the entrants and the payouts without money added or subtracted from an outside source.

(20) entrants have chosen to pay $150 (1st tier )
(20) entrants have chosen to pay $100 (2nd tier)
(20)entrants have chosen to pay $60 (3rd tier )

Total available prize fund for 1st tier players $6200
Total available prize fund for 2nd tier players $5200
Total available prize fund for 3rd tier players $3600


Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $150 entry fee

1st place $2400
2nd place $1200
3rd place $800
4th place $600
5th/6th $400 each
7th/8th $200 each

Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $100 entry fee

1st place $2200
2nd place $1000
3rd place $700
4th place $500
5th/6th $300 each
7th/8th $100 each

Payouts for entrants that have chosen to pay the $60 entry fee

1st place $1400
2nd place $800
3rd place $500
4th place $400
5th/6th $200 each
7th/8th $50 each

Okay, now what happens if a lower tier places. For the sake of argument, here is another example.

1st place was a third tier player, they would win $1400
2nd place was a third tier player, they would win $800
3rd place was a 1st tier player, they would win $800
4th place was a 2nd tier player, they would win $500

And so on...



Inevitably there will be "extra" money left over from the the tournament after the payouts. This money should be dumped into the following tour stops 1st tier prize fund. The monetary growth of the the "jackpot" would be substantial from stop to stop and would encourage players to play with "maximum coins". This format, in my opinion, would work best in a handicapped tournament.

Your Thought?
Click to expand...

Not bad idea. One thing i like in one tournament i entered long long time ago, overseas is 1st four got paid, and some of the fund went into a dinner or drink certificate to each of the remaining 36 players ($300) worth, went back to the pool room kitchen.
 
realkingcobra said:
Pool "Tournaments" when more than 75% of the prize money is coming from the players, is nothing more than a gambling ring game designed to collect up the money from the lesser players and hand it over to the better players....I don't care how anyone looks at it otherwise. A world class players income is limited by the amount of contributions to the tournament system of earnings base on those that'll pay to play, and based on how much has to be paid overall. The consequences of this tournament/ring game system to pull in these contributors is to give them a shot at the possibility of makinf some money, or to beat a Pro during the event....by calling for shorter races, alternating breaks, different rules....or rule changes that they feel benefit their chances to win. And people wonder why there's no corporate sponsorship stepping up to supports this sport that has been so bastardized over the years;)

Glen
Click to expand...

I agree with you here..
 
alexndayton said:
How about you format it like this.
Tier 1 $50 entry
Tier 2 $100 entry
Tier 3 $150 entry

Each tier payout for example:
$1500 $1000 $500

So if your in tier 3 and win you get all 3 first places...if you get 2nd and a guy in tier 2 wins you get 1st place money in tier 3 and 2nd place money in the other tiers....basically the top 3 highest finishers in tier 3 get paid out top tier money then top 3 finishers in tier 2 and 3 get paid tier 2 money....numbers and places paid are just for example would be adjusted accordingly....
Click to expand...


That's pretty close to the usual non handicapped format as I know it. Instead of getting a spot, A-D level players pay less entry fee than pro and open players. That way its easier to adjust the entry fee amount, as opposed to calculating different payouts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top