My problems with the fitz

bohsman

Just to counter the thread on the Merrion, the only thing Im not happy with is the end of month tourny, the new starting time of 9 o clock will make little or no difference to people who do well it will still finish after 3/4 in the morning.

Paying 18th place 400 and 6th place 600 is an absolute joke, fair enough give 18th through 10th their money back but there is a huge difference between 18th and 6th

careca

I also dislike 'coming in the money' and only getting your stake back. It feels like you lost. Regardless of how many get paid there should be some small profit for anyone who gets in the money. For instance, last Friday I came 9th and got my 100 back, as did 6th, 7th and 8th yet the winner got 2400. If they even took 200 of the winner we could have got 150 each. And I know the winner deserves the most and so on but if I won I would be happy with the lesser amount.

bohsman

Yea Im only suggesting it as an alternative I honestly think 18 places are too many to pay maybe give the top 10 decent money with a decent increase between each placing that way making the money you will be well rewarded for coming through a huge field

Davey Devil

That's a good point Oscar and one I've made before on boards.

From a few months ago:

Davey Devil wrote:

Just thinking there that that's a very odd pay-out they adopted. From what Ken says you got €300 if you came 18th and 6th only gets €500. That seams like a joke to be honest. I mean anyone who's got down that far in a tournament will realise once it gets to the last 15 runners or so it's bloody hard work. It's all-in or nothing most of the time - a really high pressure situation. Everytime a player gets knocked out you feel like you climed that little bit higher up a very big mountain. That's an awful lot of climbing to go from 18th to 6th and only recieve an extra €200 for your efforts.

I'd prefer to see them start the money at around 13th/14th and have a steady rise in pay-outs the further you get from there.

Hectorjelly

careca wrote:

I also dislike 'coming in the money' and only getting your stake back. It feels like you lost. Regardless of how many get paid there should be some small profit for anyone who gets in the money. For instance, last Friday I came 9th and got my 100 back, as did 6th, 7th and 8th yet the winner got 2400. If they even took 200 of the winner we could have got 150 each. And I know the winner deserves the most and so on but if I won I would be happy with the lesser amount.

A better solution would be not to give 6 - 9 anything back.

Hectorjelly

bohsman wrote:

Yea Im only suggesting it as an alternative I honestly think 18 places are too many to pay maybe give the top 10 decent money with a decent increase between each placing that way making the money you will be well rewarded for coming through a huge field

How big was the field?

pokertroll

Why not an 8PM start even?

Personally I think the fitz is too lax with regard to starting times. People are getting away with turning up whenever they want.

Many a time I have arrived in at 9, with the tournament kicking off at 9:40 or whatever and latecomers arriving after 10 etc. Its a late enough night as it is so I would welcome any improvements.
I agree with the comments about prize money etc.

Keep the money for the last 9.

I will not hear any more bad words against the Fitz,though.

bohsman

96. 90 started with the next 6 coming in as people got knocked out.

Just adding that there will be a 9 0 clock sharp start this thursday and this month only they will let people in late. the freeroll will start at 5

DapperGent

My problems with the Fitz:

1. Payout structure like the lads above. I personally feel the amount assigned to 1st place in the tournaments is too high. First of all 1st usually being double 2nd is far too much of a reward for winning the heads up battle. I'd like to see a situation where both 1st and 2nd are reduced and made a touch more comparable. Something like: 1st 1000 2nd 700 3rd 450. Not exactly but a gentler rise in payouts and a concerted attempt to make any given cash prize worthwhile.

I'd like to see the lowest prize being twice your buyin, the way I see it the €100 or whatever I pay for the tournament is worth it from the point of view of enjoyment, learning and a shot at the money. If I win something, I want it to be something worthwhile. I've come fourth in tourneys in the fitz and got what I consider to be fúck all out of the prize fund for a good placing. This is compounded by the huge blind levels at the final tables in the 20 game and others, it's one thing losing and getting feck all when you've been outplayed it's another losing and getting feck all because the blinds made the final table a crap shoot, which leads me on to point two.

2. Blind levels. I think this is a problem more in the 20 game than anywhere else but it really really needs to be addressed. I've shared this tournament and come every place from nigh on last to bubble to first. Deep into the final table the blinds are just ridiculous even monster chip leaders are throwing out a tenth or more of their stack on the BB. I know we all have homes to go to but this is the money part of the tournament and it's well worth winning, I hate the feeling that you've come so far and have a good stack but still your only options are all in or fold. A tournament has to be closed out eventually but these blind levels really lead to a crap shoot when a table is going from 7-6-5.

I recognise that the problem is far less pronounced in the €100 and €50 + €50 (great fúcking tournament) but the €20 x 4 is their bread and butter tournament and they need to sort out the final table madness. Particularily in combination with the steep prize structure that can make whether you come 5th or 1st depends entirely on luck. And I apply the luck thing to both the times I've done well at it and the times I've bubbled.

3. Tournaments really need to start on time. Also I'd like to see some of them start a bit earlier. There's no need to be married to the 9.00 ( or 9.30 or 9.50) start time. I dunno what's wrong with 8pm meself.

4. Fix the damn water machine! It takes half an hour to get a glass or water out of the fecking thing. I like my water.

5. Nicer coffer. Bigger coffee mugs. I'm a coffee snob. Christ I'm reaching here, I like the damn place too much.

6. Marq always gives me crap cards, Brendan doesn't. More Brendan and less Marq.

7. All the cute lovely serving chicks to have lower cut tops. This is not to be extended to cute dealers who are distracting enough already.

Marq

In the following I'm not speaking as a representative of the Fitzwilliam Card Club, the sentiments expressed are a personal opinion.

The field is 90+ runners. making it the top 20% that get paid. while I sit on the fence as to how much money 18-10 should get (if any at all - I don't have an opinion either way), I don't believe that anyone should complain about getting their stake back. the top three is where the proportionally greater money is in nearly every tournament ACROSS THE WORLD. Look at any major tournament (WPT, WSOP events for example) and you see that most of the money is concentrated in the top three. That's the reward for doing better than just 'making final table' (for which on certain nights you would only have to place ahead of 20-30 people). Large tournaments also almost always pay out their top 27 or 18 with each table (27-19 and 18-10) getting the same amount, just like in the Fitz's end of month game. for many of our twenty-in tournies in the fitz the prize-pool isn't big enough to jusitfiably pay out the final nine while still making 1st worth winning. When you get your stake back, it's a bonus. The more places paid out, the better for those at the final table. the less that the lower places are paid out, the better it is for those that have the chips at the end. I think this is fair. Think about it - the chips you have in a tournament do not correspond to the money you win at the end of it. at the final table, your large stack is worth proportionally less prize-mone wise than shorter stacks, because even if you hold every single chip, others are getting paid. That's why I favour the top three getting proportionally more, because they earn it. prize-money is top-heavy, and those that got their stake back I don't feel should complain, because if they got the bubble they'd be down money as opposed to breaking even.

hope that makes sense.

Marq

DapperGent wrote:

2. Blind levels.
5th or 1st depends entirely on luck. And I apply the luck thing to both the times I've done well at it and the times I've bubbled.

Agreed.

6. Marq always gives me crap cards, Brendan doesn't. More Brendan and less Marq.

I'll make sure not to be dealing you in the tournament I'm staking you in on thursday then.

This is not to be extended to cute dealers who are distracting enough already.

fortunately for you dapper I'm not allowed wear a low-cut top

Hectorjelly

We've had this discussion on the 1808 forums recently, basically my view is that the tournament structure should be very top heavy. This suits better players, especially players who are good shorthanded. BTW I dont include myself in the ranks of better players offline, I cant remember the last time Ive even doubled up in a offline tournament recently.

Iago

All my ponts have already been made (especially the low cut tops on the waitresses!! that would definitely get me in there every night )..................


........now where was I, oh yeah..

Games have to start earlier, I've found myself playing less and less because I know that if I do well I'm going to have a maximum of about 4 hours sleep and then have to face a full day in work, it's just not worth it...I need my sleep. If the game started between 7-8 I'd be in there a lot more.

I agree with some of the comments regarding prizes, I would rather pay top 4-5 and double the money paid to them than ensure that the final 9 each got something.

1st 800 2nd 600 3rd 400 4th 300 5th 200

would be reasonable, with anything over that amount being weighted towards the top 3, so almost a guaranteed 2-300 for 4th and 5th, and the remainder being split between the top 3. Hopefully bringing up first to 1,000 or thereabouts..

Increase the time for the blinds when you get down to the last two tables or so, as mentioned already there's a lot of hard work put into getting there without being blinded away

in saying this they have started making some positive changes already which is encouraging imho

gerire

Just want to show the breakdown that was just used in a recent tournament I just played on Gaming Club, 90+ started[edit]131 started[/edit] in a $5 freezeout. I think the thing mainly to look at is the % they offer to those making the final table rather that the ammounts. The last person gets slightly greater than invested which I feel is important

Lafortezza

DapperGent wrote:

1. Payout structure like the lads above.

I still think personally that it should be top heavy. Even though I've never won a tournament outright, you should get paid proportionally alot more for finishing first to third. Money back and all that is fine, but honestly it doesn't make much difference to me if I get the bubble/money back/twice my buy-in in prizemoney. I'm still going to feel píssed that I didn't get more after playing poker for 4 hours+

DapperGent wrote:

2. Blind levels.

They are ridiculous in the €20 game, similarly so in the Freeroll but its the freeroll after all. Even the €50+€50 and €100 game they get quite unwieldy late on.
The one thing they are good for is changing the style of tournament poker you play. You have to become alot more concentrated on timing of raises, you have to try and read people better and more accurately. It can be a bit of a 52-48 cointoss-fest but thats part of poker and thats when you have to try to search for the edge over poorer players.

DapperGent wrote:

6. Marq always gives me crap cards, Brendan doesn't. More Brendan and less Marq.

I always prefer to see Marq or Brendan or Ciaran dealing my table. You feel less bad insulting them and their respective mothers compared to other dealers that you don't know too well...

DapperGent wrote:

7. All the cute lovely serving chicks to have lower cut tops. This is not to be extended to cute dealers who are distracting enough already.

Dunno what Fitz Card Club you lot are referring to but cleavage levels have always been pretty high.

Hyzepher

lafortezza wrote:

Dunno what Fitz Card Club you lot are referring to but cleavage levels have always been pretty high.

Especially on Dapper himself!

Hyzepher

DapperGent

lafortezza wrote:

I still think personally that it should be top heavy. Even though I've never won a tournament outright, you should get paid proportionally alot more for finishing first to third. Money back and all that is fine, but honestly it doesn't make much difference to me if I get the bubble/money back/twice my buy-in in prizemoney. I'm still going to feel píssed that I didn't get more after playing poker for 4 hours+

I believe in a top heavy prize structure but I think that every prize should be worthwhile and should start at 2 X Buy in. I also don't think there should be such a huge difference between first and second. A goodly difference yeah but not 1st being twice as much as second. On a €2000 prize fund I'd like to see a structure like 1st 800 2nd 500 3rd 300 4th 200 5th 200. Something like that still top heavy still good prize for first but each prize being worthwhile.

Dunno what Fitz Card Club you lot are referring to but cleavage levels have always been pretty high.

Things can always get better.

Marq

lafortezza wrote:

II always prefer to see Marq or Brendan or Ciaran dealing my table. You feel less bad insulting them and their respective mothers compared to other dealers that you don't know too well...

DeV took it upon himself to insult my mother one night while I was dealing a final table. Had it been anyone else I would have asked Luke to have a quiet word in his ear about correct table etiquette. As it was Tom I waited until I had him at a table when we were playing and then I insulted his mother til he cried like a baby.

The bottom line here is, don't insult dealers' mothers. you're liable to be turfed out of the club.

amp

I for one, respect the dealer.

especially when one of them you gives you Kd back along with another king after you accidentally knocked over the first Kd he gave you. Cheers Bren, too bad I didn't slow play them

DeVore

Ah now Marq it was one of those things that is said because its too funny not to at the time.... btw I told Luke a couple of weeks ago about that incident (over a SNG) and he howled laughing (while Dave Hickson scowled at me over his cards). Luke and I share a certain "coolock" sense of humour Sorry about it again but it just came out

Mind you I wouldnt have said it to Snowy or Fran. (First time I met Fran I thought he was going to knife me!).

DeV.

MadsL

I for one, respect the dealer.

especially when one of them you gives you Kd back along with another king after you accidentally knocked over the first Kd he gave you. Cheers Bren, too bad I didn't slow play them

That was freaky...

BigDragon

He dealt me AA twice in a row 8-handed at the Euro20 final table last night.

He also gave me crap hands after that...........

Davey Devil

Don't get me started on Bren. He gaves me junk all night, 2 hands into the final table with me on the short stack he gives me JJ. Finally a good hand. Of course he gives someone else AA, probably you Dragon. Even hit the flush but the aces had a spade too. It's not you fault Brendon I'm just a moaning old bitch Less Brendon more Marq.

BigDragon

Davey Devil wrote:

Don't get me started on Bren. He gaves me junk all night, 2 hands into the final table with me on the short stack he gives me JJ. Finally a good hand. Of course he gives someone else AA, probably you Dragon. Even hit the flush but the aces had a spade too. It's not you fault Brendon I'm just a moaning old bitch Less Brendon more Marq.

Wasn't me DD. I went all in both times but had no callers. I do remember the hand. I think it was the chinese guy. Could be wrong.

Davey Devil

Yeah it was the Asian dude, I thought BigDragon sounded oriental.

BigDragon

Davey Devil wrote:

Yeah it was the Asian dude, I thought BigDragon sounded oriental.

No, Im the big balding fella. Was earing red tshirt in seat 1 at final table. Play rugby for (and chairman of) a team in the summer called Kildare Dragons

Use bigDragon on ladbrokes too.