Goodspeed wrote:Hazza was expected to win against Soldier, but the sweep was unexpected.
Sacre bleu!
Goodspeed wrote:Hazza was expected to win against Soldier, but the sweep was unexpected.
Goodspeed wrote:If you make it too low, after a certain amount of matches the people on the bottom of the standings don't stand a chance anymore and the people on top just keep betting the max on every match. You even see this in the current events in the later stages. Imo it should be possible (technically possible, with perfect luck) for everyone near the average amount of points to win until there are 3 or 4 matches left, imo.
Could consider lowering it a bit though.
Goodspeed wrote:Fun fact: Had Tit really won 4-3, Thrar would have won over 40000 points and would now be sitting at ~80000. That would have broken the all time records for most points ever, as well as the all-time record for most points won in a single match. It wasn't meant to be, though.
Garja wrote:It is actually the opposite if you think about. By keeping betting limit low in relation to the original stack there is less inflaction and every single match is going to be relevant. Of course if dont' win a single bet you probably won't be able to fight for the first pot.
High amount of betting makes combacks possible but it also makes players go way too far on top. In fact there less chance to comeback with this system imo.
There is definitely more comeback potential this way. You need only do some maths to prove this. And that's the point: I want everyone to be able to participate until the end. With low limits, when we get to the semi-finals there would be at best like 3 people who can still win. The current way, even someone with 1000 points can still win when we get to the semis, if they bet perfectly.Garja wrote:Goodspeed wrote:If you make it too low, after a certain amount of matches the people on the bottom of the standings don't stand a chance anymore and the people on top just keep betting the max on every match. You even see this in the current events in the later stages. Imo it should be possible (technically possible, with perfect luck) for everyone near the average amount of points to win until there are 3 or 4 matches left, imo.
Could consider lowering it a bit though.
It is actually the opposite if you think about. By keeping betting limit low in relation to the original stack there is less inflaction and every single match is going to be relevant. Of course if dont' win a single bet you probably won't be able to fight for the first pot.
High amount of betting makes combacks possible but it also makes players go way too far on top. In fact there less chance to comeback with this system imo.
With such a system, consistency would win the event. I did add consistency scores (column F of the standings sheet) so that people who are interested can keep track of who is doing well at that.Garja wrote:The problem is exactly big swings. With low bets group remains compact till the end. With high bets few guys get lucky and go away on top and can only lose if someone gets equally lucky.
Can always make it so that final 8 matches or so have double scoring points.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests
Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?
Which streams do you wish to see listed?