how deep do your tourneys pay?

[mikeiniowa]

there has been some fireworks in the last month from one player about our payout for our weekly tourney that I run with another guy. We use a payout schedule that I found on the internet a few years ago.

Anyway we have been paying the same according to the schedule for a few years now and one guy is making a fuss about how deep we pay.
We state that we a paying 25% of the field. But we only pay 25% if we have the minimum for the payout. For example if we have:

24 players we pay 5-6
27 players we pay 5-6
31 players we pay 5-6
32 players we pay 7-8
32-47 players we pay 7-8
48-64 we pay 9-12

basically we only pay 25% when it gets to the next level not when the first spot in the tie hits 25%. Does this make sense?

How do the tourneys that you go to pay out? Is this fair? We pay out according to the schedule so we are always consistant. It is just one guy doing the *****ing but this does bother me.

Mike Athens

 

[mikepage]

[...]

We state that we a paying 25% of the field. [...]

How do the tourneys that you go to pay out? Is this fair? We pay out according to the schedule so we are always consistant. [...]

Mike Athens

Hi Mike

You have one of the more successful weekly tournaments, so perhaps other people should be asking *you* how best to run one, but...

All payout schedules are "fair," imo, even winner takes all. The key is that people know what they're driving across town for.

I think you should not say you are paying 25% of the field when you are in fact paying *up to* 25% of the field. Perhaps you could deepen your payouts a bit and claim to pay "at least 20% of the field"? So you would jump to 7/8 at 30 rather than at 32, and you would jump to 13/16 at 60 rather than at 65.

I run monthly tournaments where I pay out at least 25%. So I start paying 9-12 at 33 players. That thins out the payouts of course, but the flip side is I have more people going home feeling they at least got their entry fee back

mike page
fargo

 

[mikeiniowa]

bump bump bump

 

[jjinfla]

What is his complaint? That you pay too many people?

How do you break down the money?

Here they usually pay only 3 spots up to 24-27 players. Then they go to 4 spots up to 32.

I think that sucks since I find myself coming in 4th a lot.

But the owner/TD likes to boast of a high 1st place payout.

 

[Snapshot9]

my ,02 cents

A 1/4 of the field is customary to pay out,
however, if you pay more than that, or if it
reduces the payouts above, like 1st,2nd, 3rd
reduces their money to where it loses it's
'drawing' power to play in the tournament,
then people will pay less places to keep the
money paid back higher because that is what
draws players to play in the first place. Players
ate drawn by what 1st is paying, not 4th or 6rh,
and if 1st isn't paying good, many players will pass
on playing in the tournament, because they are
figuring what their net profit for the night would
be if they won the tournament. For the better
players, it is profit and fun, not just fun. Some
people depend on tournament money, especially
if they don't have a full time job. By the time
you add up food, drinks, entry fee, quarters that
you spend, some people need to get that money
back, and more.

Some people wiil spread the payout where 2nd just
gets a little less than 1st (like $75, then $50), but
this can make a big difference to some people. A
tournament that pays $100 plus is considered a good
tournament. Less than a $100 is considered mediorce,
and might not be worth the time. Why, because the
better players usually play for money, and they can go
get a money game rather than playing in the tournament,
and have better odds of making more money is a shorter
time. A tournament that pays $80 for 1st that costs me
in food, drinks, entry fee, and quarters about $35-$40
is hardly worth my time. I can go get a $50-$100 a set
9 ball game to where I can make more money faster.

1st place money needs to be good - that draws players.
2nd place should be 40-50% of 1st.
3rd should be 40-50% of 2nd.
and so on.

some people would do 80,40,20 in a $10 tournament
I would do 90, 40 , and 10
because usually the last payout place only gets back = entry fee,
and the extra $10 on 1st draws more players.

Want to get money back? Learn to play better. The people that
got money back did. They put the time and effort in their game.
That's the whole idea of Pool to begin with. You get back what you
put into it, and nothing more.

 

[mikeiniowa]

how much we paid last week

last sunday we had 43 players including quite a few players who drove over 2 hours to get a shot at our payout. Omaha, quad Cities, Fort Dodge, and Cedar Rapids were all represented.

the tourney payouts from memory were:

1-230
2-185
3-130-
4-80
5/6 -50
7/8 -35

we always pay top 4 in the calcutta unless we have less then about 28 but that has only happened once in 8 months. We pay 40%-30%-20%-10%.

last week we had a new high for the calcutta 900 dollars. so we paid

1-360
2-270
3-180
4-90

not bad for a weekly tourney. so if the winner got all of himself he got almost 600 dollars. the 3rd place finisher bought himself for $10 came out pretty good. Jesse Boweman was the 1st blind pick and went for I think around 130. Jamie Baraks was the next blind and then Chad Vilmont and Josh Johnson.

A 1/4 of the field is customary to pay out,
however, if you pay more than that, or if it
reduces the payouts above, like 1st,2nd, 3rd
reduces their money to where it loses it's
'drawing' power to play in the tournament,
then people will pay less places to keep the
money paid back higher because that is what
draws players to play in the first place. Players
ate drawn by what 1st is paying, not 4th or 6rh,
and if 1st isn't paying good, many players will pass
on playing in the tournament, because they are
figuring what their net profit for the night would
be if they won the tournament. For the better
players, it is profit and fun, not just fun. Some
people depend on tournament money, especially
if they don't have a full time job. By the time
you add up food, drinks, entry fee, quarters that
you spend, some people need to get that money
back, and more.

Some people wiil spread the payout where 2nd just
gets a little less than 1st (like $75, then $50), but
this can make a big difference to some people. A
tournament that pays $100 plus is considered a good
tournament. Less than a $100 is considered mediorce,
and might not be worth the time. Why, because the
better players usually play for money, and they can go
get a money game rather than playing in the tournament,
and have better odds of making more money is a shorter
time. A tournament that pays $80 for 1st that costs me
in food, drinks, entry fee, and quarters about $35-$40
is hardly worth my time. I can go get a $50-$100 a set
9 ball game to where I can make more money faster.

1st place money needs to be good - that draws players.
2nd place should be 40-50% of 1st.
3rd should be 40-50% of 2nd.
and so on.

some people would do 80,40,20 in a $10 tournament
I would do 90, 40 , and 10
because usually the last payout place only gets back = entry fee,
and the extra $10 on 1st draws more players.

Want to get money back? Learn to play better. The people that
got money back did. They put the time and effort in their game.
That's the whole idea of Pool to begin with. You get back what you
put into it, and nothing more.

 

[akaTrigger]

A 1/4 of the field is customary to pay out,
however, if you pay more than that, or if it
reduces the payouts above, like 1st,2nd, 3rd
reduces their money to where it loses it's
'drawing' power to play in the tournament,
then people will pay less places to keep the
money paid back higher because that is what
draws players to play in the first place. Players
ate drawn by what 1st is paying, not 4th or 6rh,
and if 1st isn't paying good, many players will pass
on playing in the tournament, because they are
figuring what their net profit for the night would
be if they won the tournament. For the better
players, it is profit and fun, not just fun. Some
people depend on tournament money, especially
if they don't have a full time job. By the time
you add up food, drinks, entry fee, quarters that
you spend, some people need to get that money
back, and more.

Some people wiil spread the payout where 2nd just
gets a little less than 1st (like $75, then $50), but
this can make a big difference to some people. A
tournament that pays $100 plus is considered a good
tournament. Less than a $100 is considered mediorce,
and might not be worth the time. Why, because the
better players usually play for money, and they can go
get a money game rather than playing in the tournament,
and have better odds of making more money is a shorter
time. A tournament that pays $80 for 1st that costs me
in food, drinks, entry fee, and quarters about $35-$40
is hardly worth my time. I can go get a $50-$100 a set
9 ball game to where I can make more money faster.

1st place money needs to be good - that draws players.
2nd place should be 40-50% of 1st.
3rd should be 40-50% of 2nd.
and so on.

some people would do 80,40,20 in a $10 tournament
I would do 90, 40 , and 10
because usually the last payout place only gets back = entry fee,
and the extra $10 on 1st draws more players.

Want to get money back? Learn to play better. The people that
got money back did. They put the time and effort in their game.
That's the whole idea of Pool to begin with. You get back what you
put into it, and nothing more.

Snapshot9 makes good points about the payouts. I help run the Hunter Classics Women's Tour and we pay 1/3 to 1/2 of the field everytime [we based this on a poll we took around 1998] but.... we also have $2,000 added (at least) to every tournament and first place is always $750. So, with an entry of only $30, the ladies seem to like our payouts deep in the field with a high first place amount. I know comparing a regional tour to a weekly tournament doesn't seem fair, but I think it helps reinforce what Snapshot9 was stating about the payouts.

-Melinda

 

[Snapshot9]

Tourney's

not bad for a weekly tourney. so if the winner got all of himself he got almost 600 dollars. the 3rd place finisher bought himself for $10 came out pretty good. Jesse Boweman was the 1st blind pick and went for I think around 130. Jamie Baraks was the next blind and then Chad Vilmont and Josh Johnson.

I played Chad Vilmont a few years ago in Shooter's big Thanksgiving
weekend tournament, and he put me on the 1 loss side. We went
hill-to-hill. Both Jesse and his brother were playing in the tournament
too. If I remember right, I think Jesse won it, beating Jr. Brown in the
final match. We get some real good players here for the Thanksgiving
tournament, names like Tony Fargo, Cliff Joyner, Dave Matlock, Walden,
Gabe when he is around, and others.
Used to be $4,000 added, but is only $2,000 added now. Big calcutta
though.

 

[mikeiniowa]

Hey, I am not opposed to paying deeper in the tourney. Its just that this is the payout we have had for years, it is posted adead of time, and is the same every week. Everybody knoww what they are getting into when they enter. What gets me going is the way RG is going about it. Basically standing on a chair and calling Jody and I cheats. That is what pisses me off.

I think the payout is fair but, if enough people that were regulars to the tourney came up to me and said let's pay one spot deeper and let those players get their money back, I sure would talk to Jody about it. RG thinks we dont pay that spot because we pay top heavy because JM, WN and myself do so well in the tourney. The QC guys have been coming regular for about 3 months now and dominating the tourney. If it was about the money I would pay deeper because it is now a lot tougher to get in the top 4 to make some dough.

Mike

Mike, you know me, I'm a weekly donator to the tourney. I do it because I like to play pool and every now and then I get to draw someone very talented like you or some of the Quad cities contingent. To me it really doesn't matter how the payout is established because I don't really plan on cashing. My entry fee is just the cost to have a good time.

BUT, I know who is complaining, and eventually if enough people complain, they'll quit entering which will drive down the total purse which might drive away the better players. If paying a true 25% of the field will stop the complaints, (even if the 9-12 position only gets the entry fee back), then why not look at adjusting 2nd, 3rd, 4th just enough to cover a true 25%.

Just my thoughts.

Ray Ling

 

[T-dog]

hey?

last sunday we had 43 players including quite a few players who drove over 2 hours to get a shot at our payout. Omaha, quad Cities, Fort Dodge, and Cedar Rapids were all represented.

the tourney payouts from memory were:

1-230
2-185
3-130-
4-80
5/6 -50
7/8 -35

we always pay top 4 in the calcutta unless we have less then about 28 but that has only happened once in 8 months. We pay 40%-30%-20%-10%.

last week we had a new high for the calcutta 900 dollars. so we paid

1-360
2-270
3-180
4-90

not bad for a weekly tourney. so if the winner got all of himself he got almost 600 dollars. the 3rd place finisher bought himself for $10 came out pretty good. Jesse Boweman was the 1st blind pick and went for I think around 130. Jamie Baraks was the next blind and then Chad Vilmont and Josh Johnson.

Hey, I only got $45 for 5/6 I think I got ripped off, you guys are cheats.....lol, you know I am kidding..
shit thats $45 more than I thought I would get in that field. I think it boils down to what you want mike. Its your choice as you take the time to be there every week and it is a hassle at times. I think RG is getting upset because there are people who donate every week. Quad cities guys come down and mop up the top 3 with little going to those people who show up every week. If you want to make it a tougher tourney which I think is what makes us all better, or do you just want people to show up and donate. I am not really sure where I stand as you have stated the payouts are the same as when it was @ stix I believe. I think I should have gotten more money just because it was such a tough tourney but where does the money come from. Its 15 to get in and 3 to buy myrself in the calcutta with more than 4 players going for over $100. I like my odds........If I win.

 

[mikeiniowa]

hey I think it is great those guys are coming to play. I think the level of play stagnated when Scott Frost left town. We had no idea how good someone could be. Without somebody to lead the way, we couldnt get better. we havent had a player that could leave DSM and do good on a national level since Scott left. Now that we have a great poolhall and great players to watch, play and challenge us, we will see the level of play come up. That will make us all better, myself included and that is what I want. Being a big fish in a small pond means nothing. Until the top 5 guys can go to casino tourney and win or midwest 9-ball event or a midregional event and win, we will always be small time. Playing the best without having to goto the QC will help everybody.

Hey, I only got $45 for 5/6 I think I got ripped off, you guys are cheats.....lol, you know I am kidding..
shit thats $45 more than I thought I would get in that field. I think it boils down to what you want mike. Its your choice as you take the time to be there every week and it is a hassle at times. I think RG is getting upset because there are people who donate every week. Quad cities guys come down and mop up the top 3 with little going to those people who show up every week. If you want to make it a tougher tourney which I think is what makes us all better, or do you just want people to show up and donate. I am not really sure where I stand as you have stated the payouts are the same as when it was @ stix I believe. I think I should have gotten more money just because it was such a tough tourney but where does the money come from. Its 15 to get in and 3 to buy myrself in the calcutta with more than 4 players going for over $100. I like my odds........If I win.

 

[berberov]

i am writing from europe, and the weekly tournament here where i visit once in a while pay the TOP 4, up to 32 players. if its 32-64 players, then they pay TOP 8.
everybody makes a fuss about this and believe me, it doesnt get pretty out here in ankara.

 

[deadstroke7]

Without somebody to lead the way, we couldnt get better. we havent had a player that could leave DSM and do good on a national level since Scott left. Now that we have a great poolhall and great players to watch, play and challenge us, we will see the level of play come up. That will make us all better, myself included and that is what I want. Being a big fish in a small pond means nothing. Until the top 5 guys can go to casino tourney and win or midwest 9-ball event or a midregional event and win, we will always be small time. Playing the best without having to goto the QC will help everybody.

Absolutely Right.

ME

A first class guppy.