TP Cash League-idea crapshoot

[Wes]

Variance really has nothing to do with anything I was talking about. Since 100 NL players are going to be playing exceptionally worse competition than 1000NL players, 100 NL players are at a much bigger advantage taking this prop bet since they most likely can have much bigger winrates. Changing it by daily/weekly/monthly will not change the advantage that the lower stakes players have.

[Talking Poker]

One more thing I thought of... This needs to be changed:
0000-1999 25 points

While I don't think anyone would do this, there is nothing to prevent someone from playing 10 hands and calling it a week with some sick 150 bb/100 score. We need a minimum amount to qualify - probably 500, or better yet, 1000 hands. People should be able to get in 1000 hands in a week, I would think. Anyone should be able to do 500, anyway, even if you are just one tabling.

I agree with The Storm about the different limits, which is why I suggested coming up with some sort of multiplier to normalize the results. For example, we could multiply the $25 table results by .5 and the $1000 and higher table results by 1.5... or something like that. I'm just making numbers up here, but I think it's reasonable to say that one's expected BB/100 rate at $25 should be three times that of the $1000 winrate. I dunno. I think we should do this for all limits in order to level the playing field. We'll pick a base level and then agree on multipliers for every other level. I think the minimum table people should be allowed to play for this is $25, so we could do something like this:

$25 - .5
$50 - .7
$100 - .8
$200 - 1.0
$400 - 1.2
$600 - 1.3
$1000+ - 1.5

That's just my first stab at numbers, but I actually think they are pretty decent. I'm sure we can agree on something that's fair for everyone.

I like the BBJ idea too. We could come up with qualifying criteria and let it continue to build until someone hits it.

My final suggestion: I'm cool with starting the week of August 6th (in fact, I think that's just right), but if we do, I think we should have a "practice week" the week before, with maybe one extra day thrown in between for any last minute tweaks. That way, we'll have some results to work with and can make sure the rules are fair and adjust anything that needs adjusting.

I'd like to get some input from the lower level players who are interested in participating. Surely you guys are going to want in on this, right? I would think this would be the most +EV for the low limit guys, based on the discussions so far. And it's great inspiration to grind out a lot of hands too.

[THINKmcfly]

i really like TPs idea for this, tell me what you think of something like that storm and if you think it will work effectively?

[Talking Poker]

Every time I come back to this thread, I'm surprised to see how few new responses there are. This is the type of thing people in this forum would have jumped on in the past...

Anyhoo.... I thought about this some more last night and realized a few things. Namely, there is no need to overcomplicate it. Like, take this for example:

At first I thought this looked good and all, but really, what's the need for it? BB/100 is a perfectly good number and the most representative of one's win rate. So why bother grouping it like this? Why not just leave it as is?

So that leaves the points system for hands played per limit (and I think "per limit" is key here):

First, if that is a weekly chart, I think it goes too high. I'd much rather cap it at like 10k hands or something... I guess 20k, if some of you are REALLY playing a shitton, but I think JD's 55k played last month was about the most anyone has played around here in a long time. Also, I dont want the people who play 4000 hands per month to think they don't have a chance here. THOSE are the guys who should really get into this and strive to get more hands in.

I haven't thought about the points much, but I think the numbers above are too skewed. I mean, play 50k hands at .5 BB/100 and you get 250 points. That means, to tie, the guy playing 1999 hands (in one week, mind you) would need to be playing at 10 BB/100. Whoa... That's just too big of a difference. We should definitely reward playing a lot of hands, but not this dramatically. So we'll need to look at that more closely, IMO...

So, all of that said, I think the point system should simply be (for EVERY limit played):

BB/100 * (Hands Played Points) * (Table Size Multiplier) * (Limit Multiplier)

Add up your numbers for every limit played for the month, and tada.... you get your final score.

[THINKmcfly]

A buddy came up with a good idea and suggested we just use fractions like setting the base at 3.5 and using that fraction. So if your winrate was 2.19 you take your quantity # by 2.19/3.5.... or if the bb/100 was 11.3 you take the points for quantity of hands by 11.3/3.5, something like this... let me know what you think

ps: obv all the numbers are up for massive tweaking... the concept was what i wanted set up, now as long as we all work together on numbers and agree for the most part we'll have a system we can lean on for time being and then collectively rework the finer parts of it with each passing month

[Talking Poker]

Right... and I think the general system is great. We just need to tweak the numbers. I actually think the ones I suggested for the levels are decent, and I think the ones I suggested for game type aren't bad either, but we probably need to scale down the HU tables even more. Like you said, we can figure out those details later.

I don't really like the 3.5 thing though, because I don't see what it accomplishes, other than changing all the results by a multiple of 3.5 Relative to each other, they will still all be the same.

[THINKmcfly]

A) I dont know how I feel about allowing negative points, esp if you're -1.15 bb/100 over 15K hands
B) There must be a max bb/100 I think... At a point it shouldn't matter if you have 14 bb/100 or 29 bb/100, there should be a cap to not make the numbers ridiculous. Maybe if you ran 29bb/100 over 15k hands that should be offered a reward, but over 1k-5k hands if you run 25 or 15 I don't know there should be that huge of a difference in points? Obv open to debate

[Talking Poker]

I should have been more clear in my post... I absolutely agree that we should cap the high end of the BB/100 scale (10 seems like plenty), and I also agree that people shouldn't be docked for negative BB/100. If we do dock them, it would be way too easy for people to cheat and filter out their losing limits, anyway. This way, if someone is running particularly bad at one limit, they won't feel the need to "play out of it" and can just move on to a different (hopefully lower) limit and start fresh.