Nice great discussion here.
Looks like a split between 2B and 5B (and I thought 1B would get more votes than either one of those, wow).
I actually like what RickySteve threw out saying that:
"If this were a tournament on PokerStars, the payouts would be
4200
2500
1650
1250
840"
I understand some feel that it should be top 3 heavy *BUT* we have monthly prizes and it's most likely that the top 3 have won at least 1 monthly prize (of $500, right?). In taking consideration of that, let's spread it out a little bit among top 5 instead. Otherwise, if we put like 5K, 3K, 2K for top 3 and they *ALSO* win the monthly top prizes twice ($1K extra), that's quite high (even if it's deserving).
Perhaps the one above is a good balance of all 3 options...but with some changes... to integrate some of the pros of each options already mentioned.
Not to introduce a new option ---especially when we still don't know exactly how many players are playing yet--- but I'm wondering if more people would like this one below as a balance between the options mentioned earlier?
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 146pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="194"><col style="width: 26pt;" width="34"> <col style="width: 70pt;" width="93"> <col style="width: 50pt;" width="67"> <tbody><tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td class="xl68" style="height: 14.25pt; width: 26pt;" height="19" width="34">6A</td> <td style="width: 70pt;" width="93">
</td> <td style="width: 50pt;" width="67">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">1st</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="4500"> $ 4,500.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.43103448275862066">43.10%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">2nd</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="2500"> $ 2,500.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.23946360153256704">23.95%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">3rd</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="1840"> $ 1,840.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.17624521072796934">17.62%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">4th</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="1000"> $ 1,000.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="9.5785440613026823E-2">9.58%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">5th</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="600"> $ 600.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="5.7471264367816091E-2">5.75%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">
</td> <td class="xl66" x:num="10440" x:fmla="=SUM(B2:B6)"> $ 10,440.00 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I came to tweak the changes basically to support top 3 heavy, but also providing a nice profit for 4th & 5th places ($1K payout for 4th place & $300 profit for 5th place). I also tried to make somewhat of a double for each prize from top-down.
I'm sure J-Man & SS will see that we have been split so far, and perhaps will set up a newer thread with a poll listing final options, etc? That'd be the last hurdle, I guess.
Obviously I'm still sticking to the belief that anyone who gets paid after 5 months shouldn't get anything less than $300 profit, JMHO.
Note: Don't vote anything right now... but just continue with discussions until one of the mods say something.
* CalvinTy
Looks like a split between 2B and 5B (and I thought 1B would get more votes than either one of those, wow).
I actually like what RickySteve threw out saying that:
"If this were a tournament on PokerStars, the payouts would be
4200
2500
1650
1250
840"
I understand some feel that it should be top 3 heavy *BUT* we have monthly prizes and it's most likely that the top 3 have won at least 1 monthly prize (of $500, right?). In taking consideration of that, let's spread it out a little bit among top 5 instead. Otherwise, if we put like 5K, 3K, 2K for top 3 and they *ALSO* win the monthly top prizes twice ($1K extra), that's quite high (even if it's deserving).
Perhaps the one above is a good balance of all 3 options...but with some changes... to integrate some of the pros of each options already mentioned.
Not to introduce a new option ---especially when we still don't know exactly how many players are playing yet--- but I'm wondering if more people would like this one below as a balance between the options mentioned earlier?
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 146pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="194"><col style="width: 26pt;" width="34"> <col style="width: 70pt;" width="93"> <col style="width: 50pt;" width="67"> <tbody><tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td class="xl68" style="height: 14.25pt; width: 26pt;" height="19" width="34">6A</td> <td style="width: 70pt;" width="93">
</td> <td style="width: 50pt;" width="67">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">1st</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="4500"> $ 4,500.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.43103448275862066">43.10%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">2nd</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="2500"> $ 2,500.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.23946360153256704">23.95%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">3rd</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="1840"> $ 1,840.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="0.17624521072796934">17.62%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">4th</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="1000"> $ 1,000.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="9.5785440613026823E-2">9.58%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19"> <td style="height: 14.25pt;" height="19">5th</td> <td class="xl65" x:num="600"> $ 600.00 </td> <td class="xl67" x:num="5.7471264367816091E-2">5.75%</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 15pt;" height="20"> <td style="height: 15pt;" height="20">
</td> <td class="xl66" x:num="10440" x:fmla="=SUM(B2:B6)"> $ 10,440.00 </td> <td>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
I came to tweak the changes basically to support top 3 heavy, but also providing a nice profit for 4th & 5th places ($1K payout for 4th place & $300 profit for 5th place). I also tried to make somewhat of a double for each prize from top-down.
I'm sure J-Man & SS will see that we have been split so far, and perhaps will set up a newer thread with a poll listing final options, etc? That'd be the last hurdle, I guess.
Obviously I'm still sticking to the belief that anyone who gets paid after 5 months shouldn't get anything less than $300 profit, JMHO.
Note: Don't vote anything right now... but just continue with discussions until one of the mods say something.
* CalvinTy
It did come to my mind that someone could be 2nd every month but end up winning the top prize because the 1st place for some months were given to one-time monthly wonders.
I think I was trying to show that while they are separate prizes, they do correlate with each other. I would be SHOCKED if nobody in top 5 for season prize had won any monthly top prize. That was how I was leery with top 3 heavy, but valid point there anyway, FWS.
If a contest was just a month long, I'd understand if a winner gets only his money back. This is not a short contest. Dmmd98 said it himself that he was 5th place last year and apparently didn't get much back even though he got something back.
If a person gets only $300, forget that prize and just add it to the top prizes for the season (i.e. instead of top 5 with 5th getting $300.... might as well add that amount to top 4; no difference!)
I mean, as 5 months come to a close, if I find I'm on the bubble between cashing and not cashing, I want the difference to be either out -$300 or profit something, not a NET ZERO payout! :ughhh::ughhh:
Eh, I have said my piece on this subject about the last place getting something more than their deposit.
* CalvinTy
You misquoted me. I said "net zero payout".
Again, if it was a month-long contest, sure, getting their money back counts for something.
But a season-long contest (5 months), I think people in the bubble would rather aim to be cashing for some winnings than "yay, I got my money back after 5 months."
They would likely think that as a wash anyway. See what I mean?
Yep, look forward to your final scenarios, J-Man.
* CalvinTy
