Originally posted by tonypmm
Stars' structure of Spin multipliers is for nitsOn a side note, the Stars game with the highest risk and the highest bankroll requirements in terms of BIs is not Spin & Go and it's not even close. It's the $0.90 256-man 4x shootout SNG satellite to Sunday Million, which has 4 rounds with 4-max tables, starting stacks of 500 chips in each round, starting blinds 25/50 ante 10. The final table payouts are T$215 (via the unregistration from SM where the winner is auto-seated) / $3.43 / $3.43 / $3.42 (so basically winner-take-all), the rest of the players get nothing.
I think that good regs would need 300 BIs, weak ones - over 1000, that's if they were grinding these games and nothing else, which is an unrealistic assumption because a grinder does need to mix other SNG formats in to get enough volume. But the swings in this very format, where only 1 player out of 256 wins much, can easily be 300+ BI, as one will sometimes go 300+ games without reaching the 1st place.
I'll even be fancy and say that Spins are so 2014 
When Spin & KO (a hybrid of Spins and KOs, I mean, a better one than Party's Sit & Go Hero that degenerates into an equivalent of a 'normal' Spin once the lone ( 
) bounty player busts or the game reaches HU) or Power Up comes out (thanks for the alpha-testing and the article, btw), I'll be saying that Blast and Beat The Clock are so 2016.
Originally posted by tonypmm
Oh, what a news masterpiece did you write to praise Spin & Gos
It's worth adding, though, that:1. I'd really prefer some 'card selection' mechanics like in The Deal (where one gets to pick 2 cards to remove, which of course changes nothing in terms of probability), e.g. where each player picks a card from the face down deck and the combination of the 3 cards yields a multiplier, as opposed to the spin of the slot. Picking a card allows a recreational to feel bigger control over the situation and less likely to consider the multiplier selection process rigged. I'd definitely adore it if Stars changed the multiplier selection this way.
2. Stars' structure of Spin multipliers is for nits
I can imagine you writing another article about 'The Mental Game of Blast' (the 888poker version of Spin & Gos), which is a whole new dimension of Spins - a hybrid of them and Beat The Clock*. Or at least 'The Mental Game of Microgaming's Timed HUSNGs' (or whatever they're called). And I know that the timer in Blast (the fact that all the players are automatically put all-in once 6/8/10 minutes elapse, with no deal possible, as opposed to an automatic chip chop in Beat The Clock) makes a lot of regs soooo uncomfortable and is thus a very efficient 'reg repellent'
(as I call it; that's a word play on 'nit repellent').
The fact that the number of places paid depends on the multiplier in Blast is a decent 'reg repellent' too, as both HUSNG / Spin and STT regs have to learn to play under a payout structure yet unfamiliar to them - HU'ers need to learn ICM and STT'ers need to learn ranges in the chip EV mode - in order to be successful. On the other hand, this variety of structures makes many groups of SNG fans feel like home, as they can experience a familiar payout schedule at least once in a while.
* Well, on a historical note, though Stars' scheduled 'Time Tournaments' predate 888's BLAST, an older version of time-limited tournaments with fast-fold dealing have been 888's BreakFAST! tournaments ($1 SNAP MTTs that run during every synchronised MTT break but not at other times of the hour, where 1 rebuy is possible - a later addition, iirc - and the all-in phase starts after 6 minutes) that appeared at about the same time (July 2016) as Blast. Beat The Clock appeared later than BreakFAST!, though it's very probable that they had been developed independently of each other.
Happy Easter, I hope you have a nice time!
Thanks for all these ideas, I agree with your card match idea btw. The spin of the wheel is exciting, but agree about the illusion of control that comes with picking the cards. There have actually been studies that show something similar, but I cant remember where I read it.
Just for you, I am going to chuck a few bucks on 888 and try out Blast, might be worth another article as you have suggested.
Originally posted by tonypmm
The fact that the number of places paid depends on the multiplier in Blast is a decent 'reg repellent' too, as both HUSNG / Spin and STT regs have to learn to play under a payout structure yet unfamiliar to them - HU'ers need to learn ICM and STT'ers need to learn ranges in the chip EV mode - in order to be successful. On the other hand, this variety of structures makes many groups of SNG fans feel like home, as they can experience a familiar payout schedule at least once in a while.
!
Playing them now and this is the most interesting thing of all. My first game was winner takes all so I played cash game style, my second game was 2 places paid so I played SNG style. Blast not only has the game before the game, the game, and the game after the game (all in shoot out), it also has this novelty factor of what payout structure it is. I like it a lot.
I'm glad that Blast is to your liking, Barry!
That said, I'm afraid that you shouldn't spend time on writing an article on it right now, as that would likely be against SpinLegends' business interests - they're officially not going to stake for Blast in the near future - I guess one of the reasons is the less than optimal average cashout time - a single player can afford to wait for a few days, a stable can't.
And I definitely would like you not to start persuading them to start staking for it, as an invasion of coached players onto 888 would be against my own business interests as a player 
I'm not so afraid of those who study on their own because their studies often lack systematism.
Originally posted by tonypmm
I'm glad that Blast is to your liking, Barry!That said, I'm afraid that you shouldn't spend time on writing an article on it right now, as that would likely be against SpinLegends' business interests - they're officially not going to stake for Blast in the near future - I guess one of the reasons is the less than optimal average cashout time - a single player can afford to wait for a few days, a stable can't.
And I definitely would like you not to start persuading them to start staking for it, as an invasion of coached players onto 888 would be against my own business interests as a player
No I/we can write about anything we want, especially when Blast is an 888 game and 888 are our partners. You could argue that news about the Sunday Million is against SpinLegends interest in that respect. Don't forget PokerStrategy is owned by iPoker, but we talk about PokerStars, 888, party etc all the time. I'm not sure I've ever been told to NOT write about a particular format/promo etc because it conflicts with another.
TBH I can't see SpinLegends being interested in Blast for the reason you stated, but also because as you say the format changes from winner take all to DoN (kinda) to SNG (kinda), plus it's hard to multi table for that reason (This is IMO of course, I have no idea what they think of it).
Of course the BIG question IMO is whether Blast is softer than Spin? Hard to say, Stars have put ridic money into promoting it to new players, but 888 has the casino players.
Originally posted by BarryCarter
Of course the BIG question IMO is whether Blast is softer than Spin?
Whether the game is 'soft for the particular player' depends on what the player's strengths and weaknesses are. Especially taking into account that the Blast rake is rather high (10 / 9 / 8.6 / 7 / 6.7% at the $0.10 / 1 / 5 / 15 / 30 level) for a game that lasts for 6 minutes in 95% of cases (2x / 5x multipliers) and 8+ minutes only in 10x+ multipliers, this game isn't a walk in the park for sure.
I think that anyone who is crushing Spin & Gos and breakeven at 6-max hypers who decides to switch to Blast without enough preliminary research into its strategy, will be losing at the $5 Blast. So will anyone who is crushing 6-max hypers, breakeven at Spins and doesn't do the research. A reg who crushes both Spins and hypers but plays Blast without study might also turn out merely breakeven at the $5 Blast, because the optimal strategy in 5x tourneys is significantly different from the 6-man hyper (70%/30% payout) strategy due to the presence of the auto-all-in phase, and the Nash ranges haven't been studied numerically yet for this case.
However, I think that, despite the rake, Blast is complex enough to remain profitable at the $30 level for much longer than $30 Stars.com Spin & Gos, for those who do study Blast specifically, and create a private collection of dedicated HUDs for it (with the filtering of stats by prize pool size, of course), and learn the leaks of their particular regular opponents (the 888 player pool is of course much smaller than that of Stars).
My main mistake so far has been the neglect of the importance of a HUD.
With regard to multitabling - to each their own, but I don't seem to have any issues 4-tabling. Don't forget that 888's software is slow (has long pauses on showdowns), that 888Caption (a hotkey tool written by the Russian community moderator LikeAA) allows to act fast, and that the background colour of the table depends on the multiplier so it takes me only a split second to recall the payout structure at the table where it's my turn.
That said, it's much easier to 4-table (load 45 games an hour) than to 5-table because the 2x2 grid placement allows to reduce the need for mouse movement dramatically (it suffices to move the mouse inside a small circle surrounding the point where the borders of the 4 tables meet, and set the hotkey script to act at the table that's under the mouse, to make advance folds of weak hands possible).
Under 4-tabling, I mean having 4 games open that are not in the auto-all-in phase yet. Of course, once a table goes into the all-in mode, it can be instantly minimised or moved out to a separate 'graveyard frame' where it stays during the all-ins*, giving room for another 'real' table to be opened into its former frame in the grid.
* It's preferable to keep it open until there's a winner because otherwise the client won't write the tourney summary onto the disk.
As an illustration to your thesis that, for some 'sharks', the game ends once the 2x multiplier is selected...
PokerStars - 10/20 NL (3 max) - Holdem - 3 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4
JuanRichard (BTN): 500
shark192632 (SB): 500
Hero (BB): 500
shark192632 posts SB 10, Hero posts BB 20
Pre Flop: (pot: 30) Hero has K♦ T♠
fold, shark192632 raises to 500 and is all-in, Hero calls 480 and is all-in
Spoiler
Flop: (1,000, 2 players) A♦ T♦ K♠
Turn: (1,000, 2 players) J♣
River: (1,000, 2 players) 8♥
shark192632 shows 7♥ 2♠ (High Card, Ace)
Hero shows K♦ T♠ (Two Pair, Kings and Tens)
Hero wins 1,000
Classic!
That was at the $1 level, though - I'm not sure if I'd be earning more cents per game at $3 Stars games than at $1 ones so I was just warming down before sleep by abusing the 2x Spin challenge (part of the millionaires promo) to get a dollar and an all-in shootout ticket
Originally posted by tonypmm
With regard to multitabling - to each their own, but I don't seem to have any issues 4-tabling. Don't forget that 888's software is slow (has long pauses on showdowns), that 888Caption (a hotkey tool written by the Russian community moderator LikeAA) allows to act fast, and that the background colour of the table depends on the multiplier so it takes me only a split second to recall the payout structure at the table where it's my turn.That said, it's much easier to 4-table (load 45 games an hour) than to 5-table because the 2x2 grid placement allows to reduce the need for mouse movement dramatically (it suffices to move the mouse inside a small circle surrounding the point where the borders of the 4 tables meet, and set the hotkey script to act at the table that's under the mouse, to make advance folds of weak hands possible).
Under 4-tabling, I mean having 4 games open that are not in the auto-all-in phase yet. Of course, once a table goes into the all-in mode, it can be instantly minimised or moved out to a separate 'graveyard frame' where it stays during the all-ins*, giving room for another 'real' table to be opened into its former frame in the grid.
* It's preferable to keep it open until there's a winner because otherwise the client won't write the tourney summary onto the disk.
Fair comment, but I meant more in that it's hard(er) to alternate between 2 or 3 different strategies across the tables, ie. WTA and SNG.
Originally posted by tonypmm
As an illustration to your thesis that, for some 'sharks', the game ends once the 2x multiplier is selected...PokerStars - 10/20 NL (3 max) - Holdem - 3 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4JuanRichard (BTN): 500
shark192632 (SB): 500
Hero (BB): 500shark192632 posts SB 10, Hero posts BB 20
Pre Flop: (pot: 30) Hero has K♦ T♠
fold, shark192632 raises to 500 and is all-in, Hero calls 480 and is all-in
Spoiler
Flop: (1,000, 2 players) A♦ T♦ K♠
Turn: (1,000, 2 players) J♣
River: (1,000, 2 players) 8♥
shark192632 shows 7♥ 2♠ (High Card, Ace)
Hero shows K♦ T♠ (Two Pair, Kings and Tens)
Hero wins 1,000
Classic!
That was at the $1 level, though - I'm not sure if I'd be earning more cents per game at $3 Stars games than at $1 ones so I was just warming down before sleep by abusing the 2x Spin challenge (part of the millionaires promo) to get a dollar and an all-in shootout ticket
LOL
Not sure I've seen a 7-2 call yet, but yeah exactly this sort of thing. Lots of 5-6offsuit calls for sure.
Week 2
155 Spins/Blasts
-$18.20
Bankroll $80.80
Blog
Not a good week at Spins
Fun start at Blast (TY tonypmm)
Quite a busy week ahead for me so I probably wont play a great deal. I may deviate slightly from Lottery SNGs towards the end of the month just to try and win a few SCOOP tickets. Satellites have always been a format I've done well in, I've won a fair few live event tickets before and back in the 'glory days' I used to make a reasonable side income grinding satellites and taking the T$.
He Tony & Barry - interesting discussion that you do have!
About "what pieces we write": I would not worry so much. We can of course write everything in advertising style, but would people like that? For sure not! As a journalist Barry has to bring what matters to the people. My task within PokerStrategy and SpinLegends is to make our content what matters to people.
Of course other players like poker rooms, celebreties, industry development plays a big role,too.
Thanks for the reassurance, Sven!
Barry, we're still waiting for your personal PLO Spin & Go winning trip report 
Originally posted by tonypmm
Thanks for the reassurance, Sven!Barry, we're still waiting for your personal PLO Spin & Go winning trip report
I logged on, played four Spin & Gos, got a two x4, one x2 and x10 multiplier, won all four of them despite not knowing my hand strength when the money went in.
There you go
Jokes aside, I played a few more last night to test my retirement as a winning player, they are quite fun because they are deeper.
This is weird but interesting
I've heard this song hundreds of times, I can only assume it's on a movie soundtrack I like. I never realised he wasn't singing in English, and today I discovered he isn't singing in any language, he is an Italian crooner who wrote this song to show what American songs sounded like to Italians. It's actually 40+ years old which is really interesting because it sounds oddly contemporary.
FYI it was on the new series of Fargo which dropped this week, so far so good (not great).
Hi Barry, great blog, got yourself another follower
I actually really enjoyed the first episode. Not quite at the level of the first two seasons (yet) though, I agree.
Got to admit though, that song turned that scene into arguably the most awesome bridge montage ever shown on television.
And I never expected I would ever use the terms "awesome" and "bridge montage" in one sentence.
Originally posted by BarryCarter
Satellites have always been a format I've done well in, I've won a fair few live event tickets before and back in the 'glory days' I used to make a reasonable side income grinding satellites and taking the T$.
Btw, could you please explain why there are so many sats with >9 seats gtd? Don't they give recs a really horrible experience of bubble stalling that doesn't happen that much in SNG sats that award 1-4 seats?
What matters most in a sat imo is not the field size but the ratio of the seat value to the buy-in - the more the ratio, the more the variance, the more attractive the sat is to a rec.