TEXAS HOLDEM ONLINE POKER
TEXAS HOLDEM ONLINE POKER
|
|
Poker Tournaments |
|
Over the past few months, I
had the pleasure of playing in Texas Holdem poker tournaments at three
different locations. I continually harp on how important it is to have a
structure that moves up quickly early and slowly late, but two of these
tournaments failed to do this, resulting in a marathon on the next-to-last
day of the main event. One started at noon, and with no dinner break, the
final table convened at about 4 o’clock in the morning. The other was more
leisurely, starting at 4 o’clock in the afternoon, breaking for dinner, and
convening the final table well after sunrise, at around 7 o’clock in the
morning. This was absolutely ridiculous! Poker tournaments shouldn’t be
stamina contests. Jack McClelland, who directed the Bellagio tournament, got
it right. His tournaments moved along swiftly early and slowed down at the
final table. I can’t praise Jack highly enough for this. It is nice to see
an old dog with some new tricks, and I have no doubt that many of the
younger dogs will be able to learn them.
Chris “Jesus” Ferguson made an interesting suggestion for satisfying both those who like the long, slow Texas Holdem tournaments and those who like the shorter, faster ones. His idea is that a tournament would begin with two “optional” hours. Players could enter the tournament at any time during those first two hours and receive their full allocation of starting chips. They would come in on their big blind. This would satisfy those players who want to play the small-stakes early rounds without penalizing those who prefer sleep, side action, or just a less taxing playing day. It also would enable tournaments to start on time without discouraging or penalizing latecomers. It seems like a sensible idea to me. Who’s the best Texas Holdem tournament player? How should you evaluate your own performance in tournaments? One of my New Year’s resolutions is to evaluate my tournament play. Card Player has a rather complicated system of awarding points for high finishes in various events. This certainly shows who are winning the events, but it does not adjust ratings for events entered unsuccessfully. I am going to try to evaluate the performance of several tournament superstars, but only in events in which I play. Why only the ones in which I play? So that I can evaluate my own performance in relation to theirs (which may prove to be very embarrassing). Each Texas Holdem player will receive a green point rating (how much money they won or lost). If a tournament isn’t entered, the green point rating is zero. Note that in my rating system, a player who comes in third in a $300 buy-in tournament and receives $5,300, and then enters a $10,000 buy-in event and strikes out, will have a rating of –5,000 green points. He has done significantly worse than someone who took both days off and achieved a zero rating. Why not rate all of the Texas Holdem players in all of the tournaments? I don’t have the time or the energy, and I am more interested in seeing how my performance compares to that of the best players. I started in Tunica, and will continue through the end of the World Series. I am really doing this as a form a personal record keeping for myself. During this time, I will probably play in between 25 and 50 events. I’m not sure that this is a big enough sample to really show anything, but I will try to evaluate the results dispassionately and see what conclusions I can draw from them. I am a big believer in the benefits of accurate, extensive record keeping and frequent self-evaluation. More on that in another column. |
|
|
Back to Texas Holdem Online Poker
|
|