$20+2 180 person tourny

[Zybomb]

I am really not too big a fan of these. If you do not make the top 7, your prize money is comparable to a finish in a 20+2 SnG 9 player tourny. And you must finish in the top 3 to make any sort of decent prize money

EV wouldnt this not make sense? Or am I just way off

[humpty99]

Its definately an all or nothing type of thing for me. I agree, unless you finish top 5-7, its kind of a waste of time. I've played in three of them, and have went in with a very aggressive approach hoping for top 3 or a quick painless death. Ive finished 20 (two spots out of the money), 60ish, and 100ish. Nice return if you can win one though. I really wish (and hope they are headed for) they would run capped tourneys at more like 500 or so people. Big enough for a nice return, but small enough where it is not a crapshoot. I know smaller sites have smaller tourneys, but I really don't like playing on multiple sites at a time. I hate having to re-introduce myself to new interfaces all the time, plus I think Stars blind structures are a great balance between time issues and skillful play. Rewards skill a little more than other sites without making you want to kill yourself out of boredom.

[Aequitas58]

I like TP's second option, because I like the idea of setting a certain # of tournaments. Sometimes, it's not how good you are, but how many you play! Besides, it would allow me to play without worrying about a one-month time restraint.

Looking at my routine now, playing 5 of these per month looks like a stretch.

[Aequitas58]

Don't make the mistake of thinking a tournament with alot of entrants is a "crapshoot." With the right blind structure, you should feel comfortable with any number of entrants ... besides ... the payouts are that much better!

I used to sigh when I noticed my "recently-underway" tournament was over 1500 players. It just seemed like too many people to get through. Don't think of it that way. There are only nine players at your table, and that's all you have to worry about. It's good to keep an eye on the chipleaders, but don't force yourself to get there, or you'll self destruct. Patience is huge.

Instead of focusing on how average your stack is, or how much the chipleader has, think about how you can make money at the table. Is there a big stack who's a little TOO aggro? Can you take advantage of that if/when you get a good hand? How about the smaller stacks? Are they weak and scard of busting out? Steal their blinds. (Don't be an asshole trying to steal a $30 big blind. Wait until it's worth it.)

The reason I don't play MTTs on Party (not that I play any poker anymore) is because their lower buy-in tournaments start you off w/ 800 chips and a quickly increasing blind structure. THAT is a crapshoot. Crapshoots are shitty structures. They are all-in gamble fests by the 4-5th round. Save your money.

Stars has a good, all-around structure, but I think the jump from 100/200/25 to 200/400/25 is a little steep, imo. I remember liking Full Tilt tournaments, as well as Ultimate Bet (which probably has the best of all).

GL with the massive fields.

[BDMK]

love the new 180-seat (as well as the deep-stacked!) tourneys at stars.

i only wish they offered them at ALL buyin levels: from a measly buck to a hundred and change. i emailed them, and hope many others did, so maybe they listen...

the more choices, the merrier!

[Reel Deal]

Yep, going to email them as well.

[drizzel_121]

i liek those tourney im mostly the winner at each one im in hahah seriously dont play with me ill kill you

[culver boy]

drizzel, i think id woop ya if i had the chance... we will see tonight in the Pokerflea tourney

[SirFWALGMan]

This is probably because you have a massive bankroll.. if you have a few hundred, the shot at a thousand quick bucks for $20, and only a short field of 180 to beat is not bad.