PokerStars homepage
  • If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is 1900 the new 2000 mark

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is 1900 the new 2000 mark

    Im judt looking at the leaderboard and it seems to be the weakest scoring month ive seen since july. Is it just me noticing this?.
    Bracelet Winner



  • #2
    What about 1800 ??

    I have noticed Happy - not been a member long but i have looked into previous months and your right - don't think ive ever seen some1 over 2000 but there usually 1970 to 1980 if they win - no one seems to be able to break 1890 this month - i'm hoping whoever wins will have about 1800 !!! ( yeah right!!) then i may have a chance myself lol. Good to see you at the table Happy - hope u did better than me in the 3pm.

    Comment


    • #3
      Well I only played March and April before but I think things have changed since Black Friday.

      I notice quite a few people at the top of the leaderboard not playing at all now.

      Also I have railed a few of the previous high finishers in the past few months to see if i could garner any tips from their play and I observed that their all ins at critical points are being called by two or three players this month whereas in the past it was usually one caller or everyone folded. Certainly some of the calls with A rag, K rag, Q rag, any suited cards, brings a new meaning/dimension to starting hand strength and when there are three callers the chances of the good hand holding diminishes greatly.

      You could say that the play has got looser, or maybe, it is just more competitive. I will leave the judgement of that up to the individual.

      TC

      Comment


      • #4
        I think it has more to do with the number of players in the league ... when all the Yanks were forced out the numbers in each tourney dropped drastically and so did points awarded for each success. I think it's more likely that the top players on the leader board are statistically the same just with less points. rock

        Comment


        • #5
          You could have a point Rock, the field size does make a difference. I was at your table once and you are a tight player man. Rock is the operative wordumbup:

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by r0ck.carver View Post
            I think it has more to do with the number of players in the league ... when all the Yanks were forced out the numbers in each tourney dropped drastically and so did points awarded for each success. I think it's more likely that the top players on the leader board are statistically the same just with less points. rock
            The scoring system hasn't changed. Players still receive the same amount of points for ITM finishes.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by ssuglia View Post
              The scoring system hasn't changed. Players still receive the same amount of points for ITM finishes.
              Sorry to disagree, but if that is true then the system does not use field size as a factor as indicated in the posted information about the scoring system. However it does not have to be a big change to make a significant difference over 50+ games. At fifty games per month a reduction of 3 points per game for first and proportional reductions elsewhere would add up to a cumulative difference approaching 100 points per month. This would also result in smaller negative scores on the bottom end as well.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TrumpinJoe View Post
                Sorry to disagree, but if that is true then the system does not use field size as a factor as indicated in the posted information about the scoring system. However it does not have to be a big change to make a significant difference over 50+ games. At fifty games per month a reduction of 3 points per game for first and proportional reductions elsewhere would add up to a cumulative difference approaching 100 points per month. This would also result in smaller negative scores on the bottom end as well.
                Well, I just happened to check top's scores to see if there was much of a difference. From what I could see his ITM points are in line with previous months.

                I think the real difference in points comes from the "point bubble" to the "money bubble". Meaning players are receiving fewer points for not reaching the money.

                I do see what you're saying though, it doesn't take much of a difference in scoring per tournament to have an effect on overall scores.

                I think top hit on something though, and that is many top players not playing fewer tournaments as the end of the month. This is becoming a trend the last couple of months, as players are taking more of a wait and see approach to the leaderboard, instead of risking their position and payout.

                Comment


                • #9
                  yea simply a case of Numbers / itm 's
                  You might be a king or a little street sweeper, but sooner or later you'll dance with the reaper.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    in previous months early month itms 36 to 39 pts this month early month itms 30 to 33 pts yes it makes a big difference with less players

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      1900 the New 2000

                      The point payouts have changed with field size .....above 1870 (pre Black Friday) the avg. run of the mill ITM was 11.4 to 11.8. Now above 1870 the ITM is under 10 points. Which makes last months winning total quite impressive. But good luck winning it unless your the chosen one. The last 3 months winners were the 'chosen ones' with their big pairs holding at a substantially higher % level than the norm, and had more blind pulling them all in saves than the norm .....the hallmarks of the "chosen one".(though I cannot say that for last months winner as he snuck under the radar when they never updated the PSO for 2 weeks. but the 2 previous months I watched the ultimate winner every time they played and thats what i noticed ....and thus my Chosen One theory.

                      Also when we lost the Americans and approx. 60% of the PSO we also lost at least 60% of the best players that actually will attain an 1870 and above final score.
                      Last edited by BGBShooter; Sat May 28, 2011, 09:43 PM. Reason: Misstake

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        All i have to say is it's still a great league and lots of fun to compete in ( Don't think my girlfriend would agree though!!!) and since i started playing i have been hooked. I am going to have to cut down next month though because it takes up an awfull lot of time - and that leads to alot of ear ache !!!! lol Good luck for the rest of the month guys.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          remember 1 thing not every one can play in the same number off events
                          3 Time Bracelet Winner


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The point structure has not changed. It is the exact same, only the field size gives us less ITM points now. Less ITM points = 's lower starting average field "strength", which also effects the over point distribution.

                            Two of the main point structure "Golden Factors" are effected by the drop in players, but Nothing has actually changed in the structure itself.

                            But none of this really matters, bring back the americans ... it was more fun with them around!
                            Last edited by Da Sens Fan; Fri May 27, 2011, 10:33 PM.
                            You might be a king or a little street sweeper, but sooner or later you'll dance with the reaper.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X

                            X Cookies Information

                            We have placed cookies on your computer to improve your experience on our website. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Otherwise, we'll assume you're OK to continue.