Archive for October, 2009

If The Human Race is to Survive

October 3, 2009

If The Human Race is to Survive, and we are to step back from the precipice of oblivion, we need to start thinking logically and straightforwardly. I could not help but laugh when I heard this guy at the table tonight. As jumbled up and contradictory were his comments, so he seemed to pronounce them with the conviction of a man who believes that someone is interested in what he has to say.

Comment #1 – Rebuy satellites are crapshoots

“Its just all-in poker, to be honest. There’s not much play”

Well of course you’re right, it is largely ‘all-in’ poker, but what is wrong with that? Its £10 rebuy! The point is to allow you the chance to get a £300 seat for a tenner. Anyway this comment was just to put something out there, so that he could contradict himself later.

Comment #2 – The structure of the £25 comp is too slow.

“People travel miles to play a comp, and some people have got to go to work the next day. You can’t be sitting there at 2 or 3 in the morning when you’ve got work the next day. They could structure it so its finished by 12. Who can afford to miss a day’s work? These days? I’m normally out of the comp by 12 though so its not normally a problem.”

So dumb its difficult to know where to begin a response. If you want a tournament that has any play in it, it has to last a while. If you don’t want a late night, don’t play the tournament. If you do have a very late night that will mean you will cash so you get paid. The structure of the £25 comp has already been shaved down to the minimum. Reducing the levels or chipstacks further would have a large and unpopular impact.

Comment #3 – Shortening the levels of the comp from 24 to 20 minutes would not make much difference.

“You could take the clock down to 20, it wouldn’t make that much difference.”

So do you want to change the structure drastically or don’t you? You said you wanted it to be over by 12 midnight, but you don’t think that shaving the duration of the tournament by more than 20% would actually alter it? So why are we having this conversation?

The man was a back-door wind-up merchant, driving people mad without realising it, putting forward his cack-handed views to a table of sane people. Then again, was it a table of sane people? How many of these logic opt-outs are there? I fear that quite a lot of people actually think like this, and that is the reason why we humans find ourselves here, teetering at the brink.

“I mean, don’t they understand, people have got to work tomorrow”.