Forums

High Stakes Tournament?

• 2,840 Posts

  Tue, Sep 10 2013 8:19 PM

  MBaggese:

  WGTdbloshoe:

  So there has been some talk about setting up a tournament for higher stakes then what is currently up there now.  So this is just going to be a post to test the waters to find out A. How many players would actually be interested in player and B. How much are they willing to put into a tournament like this.

   

  A. Please let me know if you are willing to play in a high stakes tournament?  Please be honest.  It doesn't help if you say you would enter then never do.  If you would rather answer me in private just send me a friend request or message me.

  B.  What is the most you would pay for a tournament like this?  Figure on the low end 500 credits and on the high end 1000 credits. 

  C.  Would you want winner take all, top five, or top 10?

   

  - WGTdbloshoe

  I believe those asking were speaking in terms of RG's...but I also think you may have missed Dazza's suggestion a bit back...regarding higher limit RG's...but ones that were "open" for a week, for all to enter, then payed out accordingly...I'll see if I can find it and post the link here.

   

  FWIW...I don't even play the monthly/etc tourneys that are tier specific because they only pay out the Top 3...now there could be a new opportunity there...10 player RG's with top 3 payouts...seems they'd fill fast and often.

   

  Be like "speed Dating";)

   

  Edit:

  Here's Darren's post...mercy...bit longer than a week ago though;)

  http://www.wgt.com/forums/p/190768/1320966.aspx#1320966

   

  Thank you for providing the link.  It's a similar concept, and one that I think can work.  I agree with Dazza that a RG format wouldn't work since having to wait for it to fill.  Also honestly I don't think 50 players would enter, which is why the 10-20 players is a more realistic goal to shoot for at first.  Like I said testing the waters here to see the interest level.  I am completely open to all ideas on how to run it once it is established that the interest is there.

   

  - WGTdbloshoe

• MBaggese 15,378 Posts

  Tue, Sep 10 2013 9:33 PM

  All good Shoe, you're welcome.

   

  I think what Darren was saying (not to put words in his mouth) is go ahead and open a 1000cr RG for a week...if only 17 enter, fine...close it after that and scale the payouts accordingly.

   

  Heck  even if 3 day cut off fills brought 15/16...most likely those same players would be getting right back in it...so you'd have 30-ish entrants a week-even if the same 30 players- vs 6 weeks waiting for #50 to enter.

   

  I think it work well with less credit RG's as well (of course you'd need to change the name from RG to "weekly credit Tourney"...etc) heck, I could see 100's entering lower credit RG's through out the week...building a pot, giving WGT a larger rake, etc.

  I know, sorta off topic of your original intent...but don't most posts go that way? ;)

• KyRock75 411 Posts

  Tue, Sep 10 2013 10:31 PM

  MBaggese:

  I think it work well with less credit RG's as well (of course you'd need to change the name from RG to "weekly credit Tourney"...etc) heck, I could see 100's entering lower credit RG's through out the week...building a pot, giving WGT a larger rake, etc.

  This for sure Mike. If you put a 50-100c tourney out there that is open for all for the whole week it would draw a great number of entrants..but only if the leaderboard is not visible until the end. Would make for a big payout for a small entry fee which is something everybody would like.

  MBaggese:

  Heck  even if 3 day cut off fills brought 15/16...most likely those same players would be getting right back in it...so you'd have 30-ish entrants a week-even if the same 30 players- vs 6 weeks waiting for #50 to enter.

  Same thing here too   good idea to keep the tourneys moving along and not just sitting there waiting for players. 

  Would prolly play both kinds of the tourneys but would prolly lose my butt in the high stakes ones. 

  Rock

• MBaggese 15,378 Posts

  Tue, Sep 10 2013 11:15 PM

  KyRock75:

  Would prolly play both kinds of the tourneys but would prolly lose my butt in the high stakes ones. 

   

  Oh sure...start setting us up like sheep;)

   

  But in all honestly, if I could place well enough in lower credit ones at the end of 3 or 7 days, I'd jump into a higher credit one in a  heart beat...right now I live on 100cr RG's...lol!

• jackasper 47 Posts

  Wed, Sep 11 2013 12:18 AM

      I play on a few poker sites that have their regular scheduled tournaments that are both daily and hourly as well as weekly and so on. They also have "turbo" tournaments which are restricted to the first 6 or 9 players and the top 33% pay out. They fill up so fast that they have to run 30 or 40 of them at once pretty much non stop. As for the stakes, they range from ten cent buy ins to hundreds of dollars. 

      Granted this is not a poker site, I could see a similar format working quite well here. I think it's a lot like what you guys are talking about. Having fewer number of players to fill up a tournament, say 10 or 20 and then pay out the top 3 or 6. I'd bet they fill up pretty quickly. I for one would be all over it...