Cash game points

[Mac_09]

Currently run a league with 12 tourneys a season employing Dr. Neau's formula.  Considering making 1 or 2 of them a cash game using the same formula with rank based on net profit.  If we did, should net profit be the amount won or the percentage won?

Also, should a player be penalized for spending more?  When using the formula, should I consider how much the person bought-in, reloaded and re-bought for?  Or should total cost just equal the buy-in, which would be the minimum buy-in?

[Martini]

If you are going to have a cash game within the context of a league I would make everyone buy in for the same initial amount and then base the results on the net amount won or lost at the end of the session.

[Mac_09]

No, the majority of the events will be tournaments.  Only want to do one or two cash games with the same point system as the tournaments.

[Martini]

Right. What I'm saying is that for the cash game events, start everyone with the same buy in. Whoever ends up with the most net amount chips (total ending chips minus starting chips and any rebuys) at the end gets first place. Second most net chips gets second place. Etc. Award points like you would for a tourney based on the placements.

[Mac_09]

Yes, I know that, but the formula takes into account the players total cost, penalizing those that spend more.  This makes sense in a tournament, but should a player be penalized for spending more in a cash game?

Also, should player who bought in for $50 and cashed out for $100 be ranked higher than a player who bought in for $40 and cashed out for $80?  They both doubled their stack.

[Martini]

Using the *net* amount already takes total cost into account. If you play a cash game and buy in for a $100 then double up to $200 by the end, you are just as well off as someone who bought in for $100, lost it all, bought in for another $100 then rolled that up to $300 for a net of $100. Likewise, if you bought in for $100, rolled it up to $500, then lost $300 of it to end up at $200 then you would have made just as much as the other two cases, namely netting out +$100. Why would it matter how you got there? That's not how cash games work.

As for your second question, would you rather leave the evening's cash game up $50 or up $40? Seems pretty obvious to me that the person who won $50 did better than the person winning $40. If you go by percentage return then all you're doing is encouraging people to buy in for as little as possible in hopes of getting a big return percentage. If someone buys in for 1/10 of what everyone else is buying in for it is far more likely that they could get a large percentage increase than anyone buying in for a standard amount. Think about it. If you have a table of ten players what are the chances that someone could do the equivalent of stacking everyone else at the table? Conversely, if someone starts off with 1/10 of a stack it is way more feasible for them to build that up to everyone else's starting stack.

So to summarize, I would suggest you structure the cash game events in your league like this:

* Everyone buys in for $100 (or whatever you want the starting stack to be)
* People can buy up or rebuy at any time and as many times as they want
* Finishing position is determined by *net* amount won/lost
* At the end of the night, everyone calculates their net (total final chip stack - total amount spent buying chips)
* Whoever netted out the largest gain gets 1st place points
* Whoever netted out the second largest gain gets 2nd place points
* etc.

[Detroitdad]

Honestly, I just think this is a bad idea. If you want to do a cash game. Then do a cash game. Keep the points/tourney's to just the tourney's.

[Martini]

Some leagues have HU tourneys, or add in Omaha or other mixed games. Cash game is just a different poker discipline and if a league wants to add that in for variety I don't have a problem with it.

[Mac_09]

Thanks Martini!

[Wedge Rock]

We just use money for cash game points.

[Martini]

We just use money for cash game points.

That would work too though I prefer using rank for the reasons stated over in another thread:

"If you had the season be one long cash game then you'll probably find that the fish will give up and quit once they get too deep in a hole. Not only will they be too far behind but they will also have quantification of how much money they are donking off in cash games which could dry up your action from them overall as well. By using only rankings and not net amounts it will keep the league more competitive since any player could have a big night and scoop up 1st place points to get back in it. It will also keep bad players from realizing their exact dollar losses and keep them clumped together in the point standings even though some may have lost significantly more money than others."

http://forums.homepokertourney.com/index.php/topic,28471.msg304016.html#msg304016

[Mac_09]

Also, I want to have the points system the same for both tournaments and cash games.

[Jaxen]

We've done this. It works, guys who like cash games more are happy and the guys who regularly do well in tournaments get motivation to step it up in cash. Highest profit gets 1st place points. You need to set a time block for the cash game, say 4 hours, and a minimum time someone must play, maybe 2 hours or so.