|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 11/20/2009 4:02:32 PM PACIFIC |
 What should be the proper kill ratio/trigger for games?, Easy E, 2. May 2003 07:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| What is the proper kill ratio, in order to be sustainable? All of the following is based on introducing a kill concept to a game, but a kill that can be maintained (i.e. no player rebellions) long-term. The point of a kill is to allow the limits to be raised without significantly increasing the bankroll needs of the players involved. I) My first question is, what should the kill ratio, or the number of kill pots to regular pots, be as a goal, given the first two statements? And, given that ratio, what is the proper kill trigger, in big bets, that would accomplish this desired ratio? Obviously, it depends on the generally expected play (tight versus loose), but is there a target that can be set as a "rule" that will approach and generally maintain the proper kill ratio? I've heard that the trigger seems to be 10BB in the pot on average (correct or not?) to trigger the kill. Is ten big bets too low or just right? I don't see anyone saying it's too high. Would you set that as the kill for tight games, with loose being 15BB? II) Another question- what should the "sustaining trigger" be, once a kill hand is dealt? Should the sustaining trigger again be 10 or 15 big bets, but based on the kill's higher bet, in order for the following hand to remain at the kill level bet limits? And what should the "maintain-kill vs. drop down" ratio be? I'm assuming it should be a lower ratio than the "regular-to-kill hands" ratio above, but how much lower? III) How about re-kills? Should you lower the ratio by raising the trigger, in order to insure that double-plus limits caused by escalating kills don't "kill" off your game? By the way, bet levels I'm thinking of: - regular 5/10 to 7/15 kill to 10/20 rekill - 5/10, 10/20, 15/30 - 5/10, 10/20, 20/40 (should there be a full to half kill structure instead?) IV) If your answers to I-III would change for lower starting limits (microlimits up to 4/8) or higher (15/30 and above), please designate that. V) Also, if your answer is different for home games, vs casino games, include that in your answer. I suspect that the answers concerning game maintenance WILL differ between home and casino games.. ... and would online play have to be a third category, due to hand volume? Again, the two primary goals are allow a kill, but it must be maintainable. By "maintainable," I mean that the home game won't break up, and in the "real" poker world the less-skilled players won't get wiped too quickly, chasing them off. TIA for those of you who have experience with kills and their effect on the game survival. Easy E | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: What should be the proper kill ratio/trigger for games?, Andrew Wells, 2. May 2003 08:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 2. May 2003 07:35 Easy E wrote: > What is the proper kill ratio, in order to be sustainable? All of the > following is based on introducing a kill concept to a game, but a kill that can > be maintained (i.e. no player rebellions) long-term. > > The point of a kill is to allow the limits to be raised without > significantly increasing the bankroll needs of the players involved. > > I) My first question is, what should the kill ratio, or the number of kill > pots to regular pots, be as a goal, given the first two statements? > And, given that ratio, what is the proper kill trigger, in big bets, that > would accomplish this desired ratio? > > Obviously, it depends on the generally expected play (tight versus loose), but > is there a target that can be set as a "rule" that will approach and generally > maintain the proper kill ratio? > I've heard that the trigger seems to be 10BB in the pot on average (correct > or not?) to trigger the kill. Is ten big bets too low or just right? I don't > see anyone saying it's too high. Would you set that as the kill for tight > games, with loose being 15BB? > One big bet times the number of players dealt in is normal. So for a ten handed 5-10 game that would be $100. If the pot is raked, that amount should not be counted towards the kill size. There should be no kill or rekill on split pots. Only the winner of a main pot over the threshold size in the case of someone going all-in should count towards a kill. Tighter games or for half kills, you may want to reduce the amount. Such as 10-20 with a 1/2 kill at $150. > II) Another question- what should the "sustaining trigger" be, once a kill > hand is dealt? Should the sustaining trigger again be 10 or 15 big bets, but > based on the kill's higher bet, in order for the following hand to remain at the > kill level bet limits? > > And what should the "maintain-kill vs. drop down" ratio be? I'm assuming > it should be a lower ratio than the "regular-to-kill hands" ratio above, but how > much lower? > The kill pot size should remain the same for a rekill, even though the stakes are doubled for the kill hand. This will sustain a kill enough to make it interesting. Many players will automatically tighten up on a kill hand because of the increased stakes. > III) How about re-kills? Should you lower the ratio by raising the trigger, > in order to insure that double-plus limits caused by escalating kills don't > "kill" off your game? > > By the way, bet levels I'm thinking of: > - regular 5/10 to 7/15 kill to 10/20 rekill > - 5/10, 10/20, 15/30 > - 5/10, 10/20, 20/40 > > (should there be a full to half kill structure instead?) > Double kills should be avoided. Any hand more than twice the original stakes hurts the blinds too much. > IV) If your answers to I-III would change for lower starting limits > (microlimits up to 4/8) or higher (15/30 and above), please designate that. > No, but this tends to break down in shorthanded games of fewer than five players. > V) Also, if your answer is different for home games, vs casino games, include > that in your answer. I suspect that the answers concerning game maintenance > WILL differ between home and casino games.. > ... and would online play have to be a third category, due to hand volume? > The only difference would be in high/low split games. Cut the kill size in half and require a scoop to trigger. > Again, the two primary goals are allow a kill, but it must be > maintainable. By "maintainable," I mean that the home game won't break up, and > in the "real" poker world the less-skilled players won't get wiped too quickly, > chasing them off. > > TIA for those of you who have experience with kills and their effect on the > game survival. > Easy E | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: What should be the proper kill ratio/trigger for games?, Easy E, 2. May 2003 12:35 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 2. May 2003 08:35 Andrew Wells wrote: > One big bet times the number of players dealt in is normal. Wow, THAT low? And this is a "loose" game? Do you move the kill up slightly for short-handed? Seems that, since you start with 3/4 of a BB in blinds, a 5-handed game loose game could hit the kill trigger pretty often. What kind of kill ratio would you estimate this to result in, Andrew? How about your "1BB per player" rule? > Tighter games or for half kills, you may want to reduce the amount. Such as 10-20 with a 1/2 kill at $150. Do you find a half-kill game is usually more sustainable, on average, than a full-kill game? > The kill pot size should remain the same for a rekill, even though the stakes are > doubled for the kill hand. This will sustain a kill enough to make it interesting. > Many players will automatically tighten up on a kill hand because of > the increased stakes. Care to define what "interesting" means to you? In other words, what maintain-kill (Mkill) ratio are you looking for? > > > III) How about re-kills? > > Double kills should be avoided. Any hand more than twice the original stakes hurts the blinds too much. Would a rule, making the blinds trail by a level, work to offset this, in your mind? For example, $5/10 is regular. If kill/rekill is $7/15, then $10/20, the blinds for the $10/20 would be $4 and $7, rather than $2 and $5 > > > IV) If your answers to I-III would change for lower starting limits > > (microlimits up to 4/8) or higher (15/30 and above), please designate that. > No, but this tends to break down in shorthanded games of fewer than five players. Because of too many kills or not enough, in your experience? > > > V) Also, if your answer is different for home games, vs casino games > The only difference would be in high/low split games. Cut the kill size in half and > require a scoop to trigger. Cut in half but STILL require a scoop? What's your kill ratio there? TIA again... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: What should be the proper kill ratio/trigger for games?, stdioh, 2. May 2003 13:30 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think that in general, a kill game only has merrit at a full table. A short handed kill game causes insane behaviour preflop. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|