Confusing

[mugmaster200]

You want to encourage fun players to play here more but youve made the blinds faster for the lower stakes in the same event anniv#2 ?!

 

Seems bad/desperate to make low stakes players rebuy more, surely they want the same as other players, but hopefully theres a good reason

[mugmaster200]

Just checked that all levels of players paying same 5% rake...they are.... but i guess 1 group of players is getting less play time and more pressure.

Youd think if anything it should be the other way round, and especially not penalised for playing lower haha ridiculous, lets hope whoever thought that was good for players (new players coming for series) hasnt done it to the whole schedule

[Stubbe-Unibet]

First of all; appreciate the feedback and should add I've got limited to do with the MTT schedule.

11 hours ago, mugmaster200 said:

You want to encourage fun players to play here more but youve made the blinds faster for the lower stakes in the same event anniv#2 ?!

This doesn't make any sense to me. You're saying "fun players" want the slowest possible tournaments. This does not match up with any of the data I've got. Quite the contrary 🙂

11 hours ago, mugmaster200 said:

Seems bad/desperate to make low stakes players rebuy more, surely they want the same as other players, but hopefully theres a good reason

As I recall, this is partly based on player feedback and partly based on data. When we run a series, we always try to have good structures across all buyin levels, but a €1 and a €100 tournament just aren't the same. Players in a €100 MTT don't have a monthly disposable income that's 100x greater than players in €1 MTT's.
To me, it's natural there's a difference here, but it's of course about finding the right balance. I'm not saying all lower buyin tournaments should be hyper-turbo, just that the buyin does matter.

Furthermore, the tournament duration does matter. We don't want players sitting up all night, when they've got work in the morning. The €2 Fight Club had an almost identical duration to the €100 and €25 versions. 5:33 is not exactly a fast tournament for a PKO with 223 uniques.

It's also never about "making players rebuy more". Then we could simply increase the late reg to be more in line with what other sites are doing (we close late reg quite early).

11 hours ago, mugmaster200 said:

Just checked that all levels of players paying same 5% rake...they are.... but i guess 1 group of players is getting less play time and more pressure.

Youd think if anything it should be the other way round, and especially not penalised for playing lower haha ridiculous, lets hope whoever thought that was good for players (new players coming for series) hasnt done it to the whole schedule

Can't believe you're actually complaining about 5% rake 🙂 have you checked what's being charged elsewhere?

[Andy-Relax]

Since the MTT/Series schedule has everything to do with me...

I'll echo Stubbes responses to everything and add some more context.

The slower the tournament, the worse it is for bad players, because they're going to get chewed up postflop by good players. What players want, and what it good for them are two different things a lot of the time. One of the worst performing tournaments we ran during the micro series last year was the slowest tournament and at the lowest buy-in. Saying that, the schedule isn't specifically designed to make all low stakes tournaments fast, but has everything to do with them finishing at a reasonable time if they're one day tournaments. It also has nothing to do with encouraging rebuys, if we wanted that, we'd extend the late reg past 20bb starting stack (which is a lot earlier than competitors) and/or we'd just uncap the rebuy amount. We don't do either of these, at the expense of making money, to improve player experience.

We've been tailoring the blind level to adjust for field size for multiple series now, this isn't new and you're the first person to complain about the change. It's also not unique to Unibet, look at major series on other sites and you'll see the same thing.

You pay 5% rake on any PKO, at any buy-in, in any tournament, series or regular, for blind levels from 5min+ and it's been this way since Oct 2022. It's the lowest rake for PKOs in the regulated industry by a good margin. The majority of sites charge more rake at lower stakes than at higher in MTTs... $11 (10+1) vs $109 (100+9) for example, where as we do not. 

 

 

[misanthrope1]

Completely agree, Im a reasonably bad player and I never play in the slow tournaments. Dont have the attention span for them.

The worse you are, the better your chances to win the faster the blinds go up since it causes the good players to gamble more.

[mugmaster200]

 

On 2/26/2024 at 8:44 AM, Stubbe-Unibet said:

Can't believe you're actually complaining about 5% rake 🙂 have you checked what's being charged elsewhere?

Just to be clear i wasnt complaining about the rake, i checked that both buyin levels are paying the same % didnt make any other comment so not sure where thats come from.

Also there will be good players at low levels and bad players at high levels i dont think that should affect the blind structure, usually series with leaderboards especially an overall one would have the same baseline for everyone.

Anyway i enjoyed the series even though i ran like crap 😄 thanks for that, but yea i disagree strongly with different structures for same tourneys. @Stubbe-Unibet@Andy-Relax

[FeelsBadMan]

There is one simple reason for why different structures make sense. While there are people that would like the same experience as the high buyin but for an affordable price, I feel like most people would not be big fans of staying up till 5 in the morning for a 50€ top prize when they have work in the morning. When it's a 1000€+ prize the attitude changes, proportionally might be the same 50 buyins or whatever but one feels a whole lot more worth the time invested. This is pretty much the only thing that matters and Andy mentioned this as his reasoning too. 

On 2/26/2024 at 10:44 AM, Stubbe-Unibet said:

This doesn't make any sense to me. You're saying "fun players" want the slowest possible tournaments. This does not match up with any of the data I've got. Quite the contrary 🙂

This might not be the preference of all "fun players" but pretty much all the players that do prefer this at the nano stakes are fun players, that want a super slow structure to play for fun. These are the players that have fun playing poker and don't care that their hourly rate in that structure is 2 cents an hour. You see that in live tournaments too where people enjoy a multi day 200€ buyin despite it not being worth to travel to. Still doesn't mean super slow makes sense for these big series tournaments, but there is a portion of fun players that like these formats. Not every fun player is a Stubbe 😀

 

On 2/26/2024 at 12:05 PM, Andy-Relax said:

The slower the tournament, the worse it is for bad players, because they're going to get chewed up postflop by good players. What players want, and what it good for them are two different things a lot of the time. 

I hate the "the players don't know what's good for them" argument so much, especially since it was such a failure of a strategy in the gaming industry whenever it was applied. What players want is to have fun, what is good for them is to have fun, not to lose 3% less at the expense of their fun. But it's better for your bankroll to stop having fun! If they stop having fun they stop playing ... poker is not the only activity one can do for fun in the world. If players want a format that is "bad for them" but they have fun in, they should be given that format. And that's how we ended up with spins, they are the most destructive, most bad for the player format to ever exist, but people enjoy it, particularly mobile / very low on time players, so it is provided to them. This still doesn't mean that an uber slow format would have made sense for the series as I don't think it's the majority preference, only went on this tangent because it's just a dumbass argument that needs to be put out of itss misery.