muttley

Wanna bet?

That might be the best solution.

There was an interesting turnaround this month. The top 3 places in the league were taken by the top 3 places in the final leg, and the top 3 going into the final week all missed out on a place! More worrying was the turnout for week 3, which might suggest that people are becoming less inclined to play the earlier legs if they know that the added value will go to the winners of the final leg. Suggestions welcome.

One key question for people to consider is this: If you knew you were unable to play the Week 4 Leg, and it was double points, would you still play the other three legs? My answer would be "Yes. But if I scored badly in the first leg, I might give the other two legs a miss."

I would say leave it as it is this month. No-one has actually complained about the double points for Leg 4 yet, just pointed out some potential anomalies. Anything that gets the numbers up gets my vote!

Just to show how the double points could affect the league, if someone had missed the first three legs and won the final leg, they would have finished 2nd overall in the league. Other ideas: The winner of the final leg is guaranteed to match the best points score of one of the previous legs; So leg 4 winner gets 95pts this month, even if only 6 register. Each player can play a "joker", where one of there legs counts double.

My own thoughts are that it's been a big success, but have we shifted the advantage too far to the winners of the final leg? In previous months the final leg often suffered because the top places were more or less decided. It wasn't uncommon to see only 5 runners, all competing for 3rd place in the league, so seeing 12 last night was very reassuring. However, I secured 2nd place overall with two second places, a last place and a non-runner. So maybe there's too much of an advantage to the winners of the last leg? Does it need tweaking? Maybe 1.5X pts for the final leg? Maybe score pts for all 4 legs? Maybe leave it as it is?

Last night we had a great turnout for the final leg of the PL Poker League, the best ever, I think. This is no doubt due to the introduction of "double points" for the final leg, which was introduced a couple of months ago. I thought I'd start a thread to see what everyone thinks of the new scoring format.

Long term it shouldn't affect profit, but the variance can be a killer. make sure that you are playing properly bankrolled for the bigger events. On a plus side, the big tourneys usually have a bigger proportion of bad players.

I think a HUD is really useful if you're playing cash, especially if you're multitabling. If you're only playing tournaments then you're not missing out on much.

Thanks to Punters Lounge for supporting this, and to everyone who took part this month. The turnout was a little disappointing tonight, probably because 1st and 2nd were pretty much sown up. Andy made the suggestion that the last leg should be double points, and I would support that, or similar, if it made it more competitive. Unfortunately, I won't be able to play for the next two legs, as I'm in Vegas. (Obv brag). Good luck all!

Like I said, the difference is subtle. A few years ago I was in a GUKPT event and had to post the BB 3 times in 4 hands. I had a decent stack, so it didn't matter much. Had I been short and the tourney had been a BB ante tourney, it would have been terrible for me.

Psychologically, yes, but in theory it shouldn't make any difference to your BB defending strategy. There may be a need to change strategy when short stacked though. I've played a few BTN Ante Tourney's, and have concluded that the short stack theory (push/fold) is no different to a normal ante tourney, or if it is different, it's a small difference. BB Ante strategy may have to be tinkered a little, and not in a good way. Say your in a tourney and short stacked (11bb), and looking for 2 cards to shove. The blinds are approaching and you're being dealt junk. Once your UTG I reckon you need to widen your open shoving range due to the fact you will be posting 2bb on the next hand. I would shove some junky hands here, J7o, T8o etc, which would be folds in a BTN Tourney. Of course, in a BTN Tourney that means I have to hope for a better hand before the BTN hits It's very subtle, but there is a difference, I'm sure.

Yeah. And that's a fair point. I prefer the button ante though. My reason is that it's possible to have to post your "double big blind" on consecutive hands ( assuming your table breaks and you're moved straight into the BB). If you're short stacked that could be very costly. In fact it could screw up your tournament. Having a dead button, and subsequently one hand with no ante, is slightly annoying if you win the hand, but not likely to affect anyone much.

I played my first BB Ante Tourney at the weekend, having already played a couple of Button Ante Tourneys. First off, I'd like to say that I prefer both formats to the individual ante tourneys, but I wondered what everyone's preference was? I'll post my thoughts later. For anyone who doesn't play live much, the tourneys are for when one person posts the antes for the entire table. So if blinds were 100/200, typically one player would post an extra 200 as the ante. In a BTN Ante Tourney, that would be the BTN and in the BB Ante Tourney the BB would post 400 (200+200).