What I’m about to express is my opinion and I welcome all who would like to post thiers.
For many years I assisted Jack McClelland in running major tournaments. I then went on for many more years running tournaments and satellites for one of the world’s largest cardrooms. Perhaps my thinking on tournaments is old school, but are tournaments changing for the better?
Since history tournaments have typically paid 39% to 40% of the prize pool to the winner. But I recently have had a hard time finding any tournaments (at least at the places where I play) that pay more than 25% to the winner. What is going on here?
I can understand the World Series doing it. When a 40% prize pool is 8 million dollars or more, changing it to 25% doesn’t really change things much for the winner but does make a difference to the runner ups.
I recently visited a local card casino and was shocked to find that they use a 20% to 25% payout to their tournaments. Their daily tournaments only cost $40 to $200. With a $40,000 prize pool, what used to pay $16,000 now pays less than $10,000. That’s a big difference.
I can see how the casinos love it. For them it’s all about money in their pocket. With a 40% payout, usually only the top two, sometimes three, will tip as they are the ones winning the majority of the money. With a 25% payout, more people at the top get paid and thus more tips for the casino. That’s great for a casino but that’s is bad for a poker player.
Here’s why it is bad for the average player. For one, it favors the poker pro. Pro’s don’t win as many tournaments as they used too (before the WPT and television popularized poker). The competition has swelled and just about anyone with a little luck seems to win nowadays. One things the pros do have is consistency. They can get in the money and many have hundreds of final table finishes. Spreading the money out helps the pro. The average joe on the other hand, who hardly ever comes in the money but finally makes his big win and scores a first, now gets a much smaller payout. He probably won’t win again, but the one time he won 100% of the chips, he was paid only 25% of the money. That has to suck.
Secondly, the difference in payout from one finsh to the next was a lot more. It made it a challenge, an honor, a victory when one could beat an opponent and get a much higher payout. In the 25% payout structure the difference from one payout level to the next is so small, many players don’t even bother playing any more. They just chop and get out of there. Again, the casino wins, they have your money but they all get to go home early.
What happened to the thrill of victory, the feeling of self accomplishment you get when you beat the best?



