Jump to content

New MTT Payout Distribution


Leo-Unibet

Recommended Posts

 

We will from tomorrow start using a new payout distribution for MTT's. 


The old payout distribution was a bit outdated with approx 12% of all players being paid, with the new payout distribution we will have about 17% of participating players being paid, it could of course differs up or down a bit. 

We hope you will enjoy these changes as more players will be celibrating being in the money.

By the middle of next week all tournaments will be updated with the new payout distribution

Good Luck at the tables!       

 

  

  • Like 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


@comanimal wrote:

I get the reasoning behind this (create more positive experiences for more players), but no one plays with the goal of 2x or even worse 1.5x cashing (no recreationals at least). More money up top is always more appealing in my opinion. 




Hey @comanimal 

You hit the nail on the head,  a more positive experiences for more players, after all, poker should be a good experience.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but feel that changes such as these are actually worse for the players. The whole concept of MTTs are the big scores for winning, not the min cashes. If someone wants to double their money they can play a HUSNG or cash game. All this really achieves is it keeps more money in the poker eco-system and therefore more is raked long-term.

 

Leo I'd be interested to see the % changes for the payouts now. For example 1st was 20% for a 100 player field and is now 18%, 2nd 12 -> 10% etc. I'm assuming the min cash will be smaller now as a result as well?

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say im not a fan of this at all. Its not at all suiteble for the tournament structures Unibet is offering with a lot of progressive bounty, rebuy/add on and re entrys. 

If it is to make for a better experience the mtt offering should be heavely weighted towards freezeout tournaments where I can see that it would benefit recreational players to have a flater structure. 

With given structures neither people playing for fun or serious benefits from a 17% pay out structure. I understand that people unexperienced with the math might think they want this since they will "cash more often" which might seem good at first sight but accually they will win less and it will be harder to build a bankroll.

As a example on why its not a player friendly payout with given mtt structures we can take yesterdys Deep Impact:

Screenshot_18.png.c9f0f2ae7615b22ee9889528ca87c859.pngScreenshot_20.png.ab6950880cc988c4eca7e51d80bff7fa.png 

Screenshot_19.png.93199d22c1d596d9a5dc6ca6a9400caf.png

This is a 25 eur mtt that one can re enter up to 5 times. I think few people reenter as much as that but lets say that you use 2 of your 5 possible re entrys. Previously the min cash was between 78- 90 eur, enough to put you in + even after 1 or 2 re entrys, in yesterdays version one would have to finish 9th(!!) to even cover ones expenses after using 2 reentrys. Then think about how often the averedge player cash the tournament and it gets obvious that it will be hard for anybody to end up +. 

We can compare this to yesterdays Black Hole, a mtt that have the same kind of structure, 6 max & multiple reentry, the payout structure there hadent changed yet so the min cash was 18 eur, a good 3,6x the buy in, whch gives room to use a couple of the re entrys (that the tournament are deendent on to reach its gtd) and still finish in profit.

Im sorry if this sound hard but I was accualy a bit upset about this, it didint at all fit with my view of unibet as a poker site who cares about its players and the poker eco system.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

top prizes were not impressive here,few tourneys over 300EUR  for top 1,now it will be even less! aware that unibet will not interest grinders with that strategy! we want to win,not to stay on 0! lets see ,but with this news, only uos and promos mby 2 tourneys a day,and moving grind to others sites:(  still love Unibet :)

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flatter payouts are an advantage to recs, disadvantage to regs in general. So I'm not too surprised by this change, although I don't like it either. Also not surprised that nobody here likes it, as we are all regs :happyshy: As you stated @triceraatopp, it's gonna be really annoying concerning the mincashes in re-entry / rebuy-addon MTTs. However, in your screenshots it looks like the top prize in the deep impact didn't change too much? So if I'm correct by thinking it was about the same prize before for first, it looks like the changes mainly affect the mincashes but still preserve quite a lot of the top-heaviness of the MTTs, which is something I would very much like. It's obviously gonna be one or the other with more players ITM: lower mincashes or lower top prizes (or combination of both). If it's choosing between these two, I prefer the lower mincashes above the lower top prizes. It would be very interesting to see exact % numbers for the top prizes indeed (maybe also for the mincashes), as @Brocky stated. I hope Leo can give us those 😃

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Caladrias The Deep Impact is now 5k instead of 4k and didnt completly reach its gtd yesterday (199 entrys total making it rake free+25eur overlay) so top price might have been inpacted by that.

I dont have lots of statistict to provide but Screenshot_22.png.b5c419bcde3481a77dab84c3654d014e.pnghere is the cashes I could find in my spreadsheet. All except the last 4-5 ish is from when it was a 3k & 4k gtd. Last one is from the new payout structure.

I also want big cashes up top, dont get me wrong on that, but it is important to not kill the ROI. 

And that poker without regs is a rec heaven is a fallacy, without regs there is no gtd:s and then the recs will be gone to.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO more people paid can be a good format for tournaments with loads and loads of qualifiers, because for them the mincash in the target tournament can be tens of even hundreds of their normal buyins, so that's obviously nice for them to mincash and the regs get a sweetened playerpool with qualifiers that might get a bit of confidence to qualify to the event to compensate for the EV they lose in having more places paid.

It also can be fine if the tournaments are gigantic, the top prizes are still very juicy.

I feel like none of these apply to most tournaments on unibet which already suffers from the issue that the top prize just isn't attractive enough to make people register, both regs and recs. I will point out again the old 10€ sputnik when it had a 100€ first prize, very few people cared to register it. That is a more extreme example however and overall it probably won't have a massive impact on registrations, at least in the bigger field games. Personally I probably would have went with a more standard 15%.


@triceraatopp wrote:

 

This is a 25 eur mtt that one can re enter up to 5 times. I think few people reenter as much as that but lets say that you use 2 of your 5 possible re entrys. Previously the min cash was between 78- 90 eur, enough to put you in + even after 1 or 2 re entrys, in yesterdays version one would have to finish 9th(!!) to even cover ones expenses after using 2 reentrys. Then think about how often the averedge player cash the tournament and it gets obvious that it will be hard for anybody to end up +. 

 


I would point out that this was a Unibet anomaly, this is not a normal payout structure for a re-entry and the mincash is usually not this big in a re-entry tournament, keep in mind that this is just a freezout that you can register again to. The reason why it was so big is because unibet doesn't count re-entries as new entries and they are counted more like rebuys. So purely in the case of high re-entry tournaments the pay structure is probably closer to normal now (not that I didn't like the old structure, it was really nice :D ). In rebuy/addons however making the mincashes too small obviously would be really crummy for everyone since they are essentially much bigger buyin events than what the entry would suggest, and I don't think many players would be that happy to win less than that. (re-entries might intuitively seem the same but they're not, the buyins aren't added to the current stack, they're not cumulative, so they don't increase the effective buyin, but I see how smaller prizes to win across the board could make people less likely to re-entry.)

I don't think this is the end of the world, not a fan of it, and would have liked it more if the first conditions were met (*cough *cough copying other sites that meet those conditions without thinking of how unibet differs from it is kinda silly). The industry (1 site and everyone follows) is moving more and more to trying to make games unprofitable (not really the case here, they're still very profitable) but there's a reason why all sites aren't full of 90% of the field gets back their buyin MTT's, or sports bets with 1.01 odds, players won't orgasm constantly from winning tournaments for 1 buyin 90% of the time, at some point those games will become unattractive to almost anyone the more they move towards that trend.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add to that I looked at registering one of the 10e bounty MTTs an hour or so ago alongside some of the SNGs I was playing but the top prize was 55e (half way through late reg). I know you can add bounties on top but I just skipped it, really didn't feel worth it.

 

I agree with NMP though, the recs don't notice the changes on Stars because the top prizes are massive relative to the buy in but here those top prizes need to be as big as they can.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah @triceraatopp, I know it's 5k gtd, just thought the first prize from yesterday didn't seem to be lower than previously with the 5k gtd as well. But the fact that it didn't meet the guarantee will be a factor in this off course, could have pushed the first prize to be higher than what it will normally be now, idk exactly. Was just a guesstimate, exact % of prizepool numbers for the different finishing places is the only thing on which we would be able to judge :laugh:

What @FeelsBadMan says is very important as well. Deep impact is a re-entry, so shouldn't have 3.5x mincashes in general. But as he also said, Unibet doesn't count re-entries as new entries to determine how many players get ITM (which essentially makes it a rebuy without addon, lol), which doesn't make sense at all either. I guess they should just start counting re-entries in re-entry mtts as new entries, as it's supposed to be, and then a 2x mincash makes perfect sense. That's basically just what a re-entry mtt is, although it's never been applied this way on Unibet. A Unibet anomaly, as NMP said, and this should be fixed imo. Have fun software programmers 😏

On another note, what really annoyed me in the previous payout distribution for MTTs, is the sudden jumps in amount of people that are ITM. For example: 24 registered players meant 3 players ITM, 25 meant 6 ITM. 44 registered players meant 6 ITM, 46 players meant 9 ITM. Certainly the first example was annoying and very common in a few MTTs (€50 sputnik as obvious example). I hope the new distribution makes sure there's a more smooth transition between those numbers of people ITM depending on the amount of registered players. Maybe Leo can provide us with these relations between #participants/#ITM as well, I'm very interested in that. 😃

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Brocky wrote:

Just to add to that I looked at registering one of the 10e bounty MTTs an hour or so ago alongside some of the SNGs I was playing but the top prize was 55e (half way through late reg). I know you can add bounties on top but I just skipped it, really didn't feel worth it.

 


I wanted to point out that too @Brocky . Also the mincashes will be less than the buy-ins in them.

@Leo-Unibet  I think you should readjust the payouts in the bounty tournaments, at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GothMoth @Caladrias @Brocky @FeelsBadMan @triceraatoppSome background of the old payout distribution. First of all, before the payouts had way to wide spans (too many players) in the different payout slots.
This sometimes, under specific curcumstances, we could see tournaments where players being paid from 16,5% to as low as 10% . Now we narrow those payout slots down so we can hold the difference of players being paid as simular as possible no matter how many players there is in a tournament. With the new prize distribution  we have a much better control of how many players (%) will be paid out. Targeting 17% payout in all situations are in line with Unibets ambitions to care for the recreational players, with the new prize distribution we are doing so without effecting the grinders (players that win a lot of tournaments) by still having attactive top prizes. I know some of you had concerns about uing the new PD on bounty tournaments. I had a look at a tournament from yeasterday
(€400 Shooting Star Bounty) with 128 runners and compared it with a previuos day with 128 players. Below you see the differences, some of the payouts pay out less than the buyin, but all players were paid at least 1,5 times their buyin because of the bounties. I think it's fair/ok, top 6 players got pretty much the same payout as in the old payout. Paying out as little as 10-11% as we did before in some cases was so much 2005. I strongly beleive that these changes, even if not all like them now will be good for all going forward. My strong beleives are that this will help tournaments at Unibet to grow it the future. 

The player who will be knocked out as 36th in Supernova on Sunday will definitely be one of the "belivers" after that tournament. 

I appriciate all your comments and thoughts about the change      :inlove:

1907126361_Bountypayout.PNG.6307d40c8a66052b5b73e8b424b6f57e.PNG

           
    

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Leo-Unibet, great job on the new spans for the payout slots. Played a few small field MTTs last night, and it was great to see 4 or 5 people ITM where previously that was never possible, only 3 or 6 was an option with resulting big % gaps in amount of players paid out. This was a long needed change, and even though I still bubbled everywhere I really like how it is now. Props Leo for this aspect :laugh:

I also kept an eye on the deep impact again yesterday, and it had a high top prize of €1262 (!!) with a prizepool of €5569. So yes, a rather high amount of entries, but not extraordinary either. This makes me believe the top heaviness of the payouts didn't get affected that much as I think we all assumed here first, which I think we all like to see. The image Leo posted from the bounty tournament, also seems to confirm this.

Off course the money for the extra payouts has to come from somewhere, and it's easy to see this comes from lower mincashes in the new distribution. I can't say I like being paid out less than a buyin as a mincash in bounty MTTs at all... But yeah, I guess it's one or the other if more people have to be in the money. And I prefer a bigger top prize then above a bigger mincash, if I really have to choose. I would also have liked it to be a lower percentage than 17% ITM for sure, but as I said before I don't think it can be as big of a surprise as it's gotta be better for recreational players... Thus, not surprising that Unibet chooses to do this.

EDIT: haven't played a R/A mtt yet. It would be interesting to see how mincashes relate to the buyins there. Gonna keep an eye on that in the next days. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i dont like it too be honest my favirot thing about unibet is having too finish high and get high scores.... strive too improve etc. that is what makes it more fun to play at for me :P who wants a min cash anyway :s im not gonna complain tho untill i see how it affects my roll :s cant see it makeing a loss but i quite like the bigger jumps it makes up for all the time you get d****d on by some random baloon (im a semi-rec player not a grinder)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty obvious the decision has been made and our opinions as regs hold very little weight given the so called path Unibet wants to take but I do want to say that I feel the sentiment that 'old is worse' when it comes to this doesn't have to be true. The route that all poker sites have taken with MTTs over the past few years in terms of flatter payouts and bounties for a start have all but decimated the games. I don't want to keep referring to a competitor site but I feel it necessary as what we are seeing on Unibet is almost a carbon copy of Stars and how their top prizes took massive hits when they implemented these changes a few years back which led to guarantees being reduced ultimately creating a reverse snowball effect whereby a tournament like the Sunday Warm Up went from a $500k guarantee to something like $150k.

The Unibet guys and I will have to agree to disagree that these changes (and I include bounty tournaments in this) are "for the rec" because to me they're just ways to increase rake by spreading the already raked prizes thinner and more widespread throughout the player pool. Yes, recs will get a bit more play for their money with a few more min cashes but that's a very short-term view of the poker experience for recs. Pokerstars became a billion dollar poker company by doing the right things, having the biggest tournaments and allowing players to chase those massive scores. They've done their best to ruin that with rake-trap changes masked as changes "good for the recs" and I fear that Unibet are taking the same path.

I really can't emphasise enough how I believe that when you already offer cash games and SNGs, MTTs should be those games where the big scores are dreamt of for the players. As others have mentioned previously, top MTT prizes on Unibet are well behind competitors across the board but the UOS proves that if you build it, the players will come and play.

I know my post comes across as almost an attack on Unibet which is not what I'm intending for, I just think all of us on the community are passionate about building Unibet and I don't see these changes as the way to do it.

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Brocky wrote:

I think it's pretty obvious the decision has been made and our opinions as regs hold very little weight given the so called path Unibet wants to take but I do want to say that I feel the sentiment that 'old is worse' when it comes to this doesn't have to be true. The route that all poker sites have taken with MTTs over the past few years in terms of flatter payouts and bounties for a start have all but decimated the games. I don't want to keep referring to a competitor site but I feel it necessary as what we are seeing on Unibet is almost a carbon copy of Stars and how their top prizes took massive hits when they implemented these changes a few years back which led to guarantees being reduced ultimately creating a reverse snowball effect whereby a tournament like the Sunday Warm Up went from a $500k guarantee to something like $150k.

 

The Unibet guys and I will have to agree to disagree that these changes (and I include bounty tournaments in this) are "for the rec" because to me they're just ways to increase rake by spreading the already raked prizes thinner and more widespread throughout the player pool. Yes, recs will get a bit more play for their money with a few more min cashes but that's a very short-term view of the poker experience for recs. Pokerstars became a billion dollar poker company by doing the right things, having the biggest tournaments and allowing players to chase those massive scores. They've done their best to ruin that with rake-trap changes masked as changes "good for the recs" and I fear that Unibet are taking the same path.

 

I really can't emphasise enough how I believe that when you already offer cash games and SNGs, MTTs should be those games where the big scores are dreamt of for the players. As others have mentioned previously, top MTT prizes on Unibet are well behind competitors across the board but the UOS proves that if you build it, the players will come and play.

 

I know my post comes across as almost an attack on Unibet which is not what I'm intending for, I just think all of us on the community are passionate about building Unibet and I don't see these changes as the way to do it.


What he said !

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites


@Brocky wrote:

...as what we are seeing on Unibet is almost a carbon copy of Stars and how their top prizes took massive hits when they implemented these changes a few years back...

 

...I really can't emphasise enough how I believe that when you already offer cash games and SNGs, MTTs should be those games where the big scores are dreamt of for the players...


I don't know if you (and maybe also everyone who agrees) simply didn't read my previous post or ignored it, but it's really obvious that the top prizes in the MTTs did not change. I just checked it for the titan, the €10 sputnik and the €50 sputnik as well. The prizes for the win just are not lower than before, or I must be very very mistaken. So building an argumentation based on this, is simply invalid. 

 

I'd also like to emphasize that I'm not trying to be Unibet's advocate - not at all, I also very much prefer steep payouts with fewer people ITM - , but I do think that you have to look at the facts. It's pretty clear that the top prizes barely changed, if they even changed at all, so I don't think you can say the things you said here. Unibet probably kept the top prizes about the same size very consciously, exactly for the reason to keep the mtts as attractive as before.

@Brocky wrote:

 ...they're just ways to increase rake by spreading the already raked prizes thinner and more widespread throughout the player pool...

I can agree with your paragraph about the rake though. This is very true, and I hate it as well. It happens to coincide with a small advantage to recs, which then becomes the easy excuse off course to implement these changes. I'm with you on this one :Smile:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...