Tournament Payouts

[manfromoz]

I have been thinking about the distribution of tournament payouts and I am interested in getting the opinions of other players of all skill levels. The Action Pool Tour had a tournament this past weekend and the payouts were as follows:

Option 1
1 - $1000
2 - $500
3 - $325
4 - $225
5-6 - $150
7-8 - $100
9-12 - $60

What if the distribution had been "tighter" as follows:

Option 2
1 - $650
2 - $450
3 - $350
4 - $250
5-6 - $200
7-8 - $150
9-12 - $100

My question to all of you is which one is better and more appealing to you?

 

[JoeyA]

I have been thinking about the distribution of tournament payouts and I am interested in getting the opinions of other players of all skill levels. The Action Pool Tour had a tournament this past weekend and the payouts were as follows:

Option 1
1 - $1000
2 - $500
3 - $325
4 - $225
5-6 - $150
7-8 - $100
9-12 - $60

What if the distribution had been "tighter" as follows:

Option 2
1 - $650
2 - $450
3 - $350
4 - $250
5-6 - $200
7-8 - $150
9-12 - $100

My question to all of you is which one is better and more appealing to you?

Option 2 is fairer for the masses but the best players will like Option 1.

I believe in paying deep,, 25% of the field minimum and not so top heavy with first place.

My thinking is that if the majority of the players get a decent taste of the pie, they will be back and others will join the festivities.

If most of the dough is collected by one or two, the event is destined to struggle.

 

[Perk]

I like the top heavy payouts for the most part as long as your paying out close to 25% which you do. There really is not much difference in the dollar amounts between your two options for the 9-12 etc. However, since your entry fees are staggered by skill level, I can see where you might need to adjust the min cash amount to be fair. I.E. a $40 entry player may be happy with a $60 return, but your $60 entry guys might feel like they should of gotten at least a bit more. With staggered entries you might not be able to win with pleasing everyone.

Overall, I have always thought that redistributions should be made among the top 3 spots. Maybe $800/$600/$425 in your example. One thing I noticed at one of your events (maybe First Break?) is that you tend to pay deeper with the calcutta than I have seen. Maybe I mis read it? I think the calcutta payouts should be towards the very top--i.e. Win, Place or Show......

Keep up the good work.

 

[JoeyA]

I like the top heavy payouts for the most part as long as your paying out close to 25% which you do. There really is not much difference in the dollar amounts between your two options for the 9-12 etc. However, since your entry fees are staggered by skill level, I can see where you might need to adjust the min cash amount to be fair. I.E. a $40 entry player may be happy with a $60 return, but your $60 entry guys might feel like they should of gotten at least a bit more. With staggered entries you might not be able to win with pleasing everyone.

Overall, I have always thought that redistributions should be made among the top 3 spots. Maybe $800/$600/$425 in your example. One thing I noticed at one of your events (maybe First Break?) is that you tend to pay deeper with the calcutta than I have seen. Maybe I mis read it? I think the calcutta payouts should be towards the very top--i.e. Win, Place or Show......

Keep up the good work.

I see the different sides of the equation and appreciate them both.
The Calcuttas wouldn't be anything without the bottom 75% of the players. I think most Calcuttas don't pay nearly deep enough but that's just one person's opinion.....................

I've always believed that a larger pie is a better pie. Just more to split. I don't think you get that once the people figure out that the vast majority of the Calcutta money goes to the very top places.

Each to his own. One can always choose the events they like to play in and it varies from player to player. (Or should I say from Calcutta buyer to Calcutta buyer)/.

 

[Grilled Cheese]

I voted wide. Especially if it is a local tour or tournament. Makes it more appealing to more people.

Save the top heavy payouts for national level stuff where the players who show up are sponsored. They have some of their expenses covered and don't suffer the risks as much.

 

[The Chinchilla]

I don't know what the entry fee was in those examples, but I really think there should be a concerted effort to trick the bad players into thinking they did good. Give a little payout, perhaps just under what entry was, to a bunch of people.... but dont load up the bottom.... load up the top for christ's sake. Then all the people can say the "I got one round out of the money/I was in the money." It is really bs, but they can say it so it's ok.

I'm being serious too.

 

[Captain K.]

My penny for a thought.
Pro level events should be top heavy, US Open 20,000, Challege of champions winner take all ect. Many pro events have qualifiers and free entrees for past champions and sponserships.
Yearly events could have a narrow payout.
As for weekly and monthly tournaments a wide payout should be used to get more participation. I do agree that calcutas should pay one spot less than the field payout ie: Pay top 12 spots, calcutta pay top 8 spots. In a larger field you can have a second calcutta also.


Kennan

 

[Hierovision]

I like the wider distribution that still pays at least the entry fee at the low end.

I misunderstood the options at first and voted wrong

 

[JoeyA]

I just noticed that you refer to Option 2 as the "tighter" distribution. I would think that when you spread the money around more to the larger group that this would be considered "wider" distribution.

Anyway, I guess I was just not paying attention when I voted.

Don't know if anyone else voted incorrectly. Just sayin.....

I believe that if more people participate, the pie will grow. It is a well known fact that some people avoid tournaments where the payouts heavily favor the top two or three players.

It is also well known that the better players will show up when the opportunity to make a profit presents itself. They will always complain that there is no money to be made for their fine efforts which I completely understand. Fortunately for them, I believe the larger pie is better for them rather than a smaller piece of the smaller pie.

With more people participating in pool tournaments, the better players will simply be better off in the long run.

When tournaments fail, we all lose.

 

[s'portplayer]

Option 1 9-12 is 40% less that option 2 9-12.....That's not a big difference?

I like the top heavy payouts for the most part as long as your paying out close to 25% which you do. There really is not much difference in the dollar amounts between your two options for the 9-12 etc. However, since your entry fees are staggered by skill level, I can see where you might need to adjust the min cash amount to be fair. I.E. a $40 entry player may be happy with a $60 return, but your $60 entry guys might feel like they should of gotten at least a bit more. With staggered entries you might not be able to win with pleasing everyone.

Overall, I have always thought that redistributions should be made among the top 3 spots. Maybe $800/$600/$425 in your example. One thing I noticed at one of your events (maybe First Break?) is that you tend to pay deeper with the calcutta than I have seen. Maybe I mis read it? I think the calcutta payouts should be towards the very top--i.e. Win, Place or Show......

Keep up the good work.

 

[dannyb78]

The answer to the question. Depends on your goal.

I know for a fact that all the top players in our area, want the best possible payday. I would to if a new I was almost guaranteed money just for screwing my stick together.

That is not the case, I am a below average player who would consider himself lucky for cashing. If I was lucky enough to cash, it would be nice to have something worth winning. There are lot of people that look at travel money. hotel, food and other expenses when going to a tournament. So the best possible payouts are the way to go for those people.

Lets take me for example: I have Seven hour round trip to Midlothian. I have a big truck. That is lets say $100 in gas. Lets say I do well and have to come back Sunday. That is $70 maybe for a hotel. Lets say $30 for food and drinks. I am stuck around $200 before I ever receive a dime. Lets say I finish 5-6, With option 1, I am still in the hole. At least with Option 2, I got a weekend out, got do what I love and shoot some pool, be around friends, and does not cost me a dime. I am a realist. I am not winning a tournament. So a top heavy payout does me know justice.

I beleive if you want the tournament t o grow and be more sucesful. I beleive Option 2 is the way to go. Players that have zero shot to win a tournament still can get a nice little nugget for finishing 9-12
Players get tired of being the filler and not ever come out ahead if they do get a piece of the pie. I would say 85% of the players that show up may never get a top 3 finish. Those are the guys who make your tounament. Thats why there are so many "ametuer" tournaments now days. If you dont take care of the guys who cant win. Then who knows. A lot of the guys who can win on a regular basis are gonna show up regardless because thay figure they are gonna win anway. The better players may moan and groan. But in the end, they will be there anyway.

This is just what I beleive, that does not mean it right or wrong. Everyone has a opinion.

 

[JoeyA]

I know for a fact that all the top players in our area, want the best possible payday. I would to if a new I was almost guaranteed money just for screwing my stick together.

That is not the case, I am a below average player who would consider himself lucky for cashing. If I was lucky enough to cash, it would be nice to have something worth winning. There are lot of people that look at travel money. hotel, food and other expenses when going to a tournament. So the best possible payouts are the way to go for those people.

Lets take me for example: I have Seven hour round trip to Midlothian. I have a big truck. That is lets say $100 in gas. Lets say I do well and have to come back Sunday. That is $70 maybe for a hotel. Lets say $30 for food and drinks. I am stuck around $200 before I ever receive a dime. Lets say I finish 5-6, With option 1, I am still in the hole. At least with Option 2, I got a weekend out, got do what I love and shoot some pool, be around friends, and does not cost me a dime. I am a realist. I am not winning a tournament. So a top heavy payout does me know justice.

I beleive if you want the tournament t o grow and be more sucesful. I beleive Option 2 is the way to go. Players that have zero shot to win a tournament still can get a nice little nugget for finishing 9-12
Players get tired of being the filler and not ever come out ahead if they do get a piece of the pie. I would say 85% of the players that show up may never get a top 3 finish. Those are the guys who make your tounament. Thats why there are so many "ametuer" tournaments now days. If you dont take care of the guys who cant win. Then who knows. A lot of the guys who can win on a regular basis are gonna show up regardless because thay figure they are gonna win anway. The better players may moan and groan. But in the end, they will be there anyway.

This is just what I beleive, that does not mean it right or wrong. Everyone has a opinion.

Danny,
You're correct. This isn't about what's right or wrong.

As with most things, it's about; "Who's ox is getting gored?"

I agree with you, btw. And the better players should too, if they knew what was best for them in the long run.

 

[SUPERSTAR]

Just one question.

Is this strictly tournament entry fee and added money prize money payouts? Or do those figures include calcutta money added in?

Reason i ask is that some tours misrepresent prize money by adding calcutta money into the payouts when they list the payouts online, when prize money and calcutta money have nothing to do with each other.

Either way, i'm for a wider distribution. Keep the players who can't win happy, otherwise there will be no tournament or tour for the top players to make any money off of in the first place.

 

[ugotaction]

Option 2 will stop the better players from coming. All I can say is "if it ain't broke don't fix it".
Let's say you have an event in bmore, and I'm in richmond. 3 1/2 hour drive. That 30-35$ in gas, 60$ hotel 40$ food and 100$ entry. That's coming up on the 250$ range of expenses, soooo not worth it if first was 650.
Almost all players and midlevel players play as recreation and work for a living and they would come anyway. Don't drive away or hurt the players that grind these tours out for a living.

 

[manfromoz]

Answer

Guys,
Thanks for your insightful comments...it is great to hear from all of you and to hear the various points of view. To answer the previous question, The Action Pool Tour does not group calcutta payouts in with tournament payouts because, as you correctly stated, that is a complete misrepresentation. I did not intend for calutta payouts to even be part of this discussion.

I posted this poll because I am constantly thinking of ways to improve our events and make it better and more appealing to everyone. Please keep your comments coming so we can hear all point of view and do the best thing for all players!

 

[ugotaction]

The weaker players of course all would like to alter payouts, cuz it benefits them, but why? When they already pay cheaper entry and play as a hobby and work for a living. These players are ok no matter what. Amd the top players are also more loyal to tour events. Alot of recrreational players dont always show up...
My advice, Keep doin it the way ur doin it ozZy, you get top names that help your tour image, and its always a plus to see that tourneys pay 1,000. Soon you will recruit a title sponsor that will help increase your payouts and numbers better than they are now.

 

[oysteroyster]

Option 2 is better..

I have been thinking about the distribution of tournament payouts and I am interested in getting the opinions of other players of all skill levels. The Action Pool Tour had a tournament this past weekend and the payouts were as follows:

Option 1
1 - $1000
2 - $500
3 - $325
4 - $225
5-6 - $150
7-8 - $100
9-12 - $60

What if the distribution had been "tighter" as follows:

Option 2
1 - $650
2 - $450
3 - $350
4 - $250
5-6 - $200
7-8 - $150
9-12 - $100

My question to all of you is which one is better and more appealing to you?

Option 2 is way better if you ask me, you have had 7 tournaments and 5 of those has been won by the same person. Every place but 1st and 2nd are getting more money. And second is not chaning that much. So alot of different people would have benefitted for Option 2.

 

[OTB]

pro event , narrow, all others wide.......

 

[SUPERSTAR]

Guys,
Thanks for your insightful comments...it is great to hear from all of you and to hear the various points of view. To answer the previous question, The Action Pool Tour does not group calcutta payouts in with tournament payouts because, as you correctly stated, that is a complete misrepresentation. I did not intend for calutta payouts to even be part of this discussion.

Thank you for the info.
I just brought it up because there are a couple of tours that have "top heavy" payouts, but when you look at the details, you find that they included the auction money, which has led to players showing up to events thinking that it was a decent payday for their entry fee, when it really wasn't. Some have become a bit jaded as a result when it comes to getting in the car and taking a trip.
Just wanted to be sure so that people who might want to travel these events, will know ahead of time.

Nice to see decent prize money with a fairly deep payout for a change.
Keep up the good work.

 

[inside_english]

The weaker players of course all would like to alter payouts, cuz it benefits them, but why? When they already pay cheaper entry and play as a hobby and work for a living. These players are ok no matter what. Amd the top players are also more loyal to tour events. Alot of recrreational players dont always show up...
My advice, Keep doin it the way ur doin it ozZy, you get top names that help your tour image, and its always a plus to see that tourneys pay 1,000. Soon you will recruit a title sponsor that will help increase your payouts and numbers better than they are now.

Brandon, I respectfully disagree with you.

The top players are not "more loyal" to the events. They play because they HAVE to because they NEED the money.

The argument works both ways. Top players, regional grinders and aspiring professionals want to get paid...and they are right...but it is the guys like me and those below my speed that make up the bulk of any tournament...and we are also just as loyal because we continue to show up knowing we have a less than 20% chance of cashing.

While the weaker players like myself may not really care about the payouts because we most likely will NOT cash, or because we have steady jobs, is not our fault. Some of us may want a chunk of the pie (not me personally, I really don't care about the money), and they should be enticed.

Actually, I think most of the weaker players that show up for event after event are more loyal because they show up and pay, and play, and never get bought in the calcutta because they are not good enough (myself included) and they never complain.

You're favored to cash in EVERY regional event you participate in, so I can see your point, but
would you continue to show up in an event knowing you're in the bottom 20% of the field?

Anyway, I can see your points, but it works both ways.

Stronger players want to get paid, but you NEED us to donate to the overall pot, especially since added money is a pipe dream these days.