Topic-icon FTC : Fibonacci Tuesday Cup

  • jcwarriorOBb
  • jcwarriorOBb's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
03 Aug 2013 23:14 #15898 by jcwarriorOBb
jcwarriorOBb replied.
After table 3 in the FTC, it became more than evident that the rules were inadequate.

At a given moment I tried to express my disagreement on the "one table per Cup" restriction. If you take a look at the current set of rules (as of August 1st, 2013), it says:

1 table per week, on the tuesday evening, at 20:30 (utc+2)
5 tables in 5 weeks
Each player can play only one of those 5 tables

Maybe it's just me but I believe such restriction has no place in a tournament like the FTC. I expressed this before:

I believe it would be better if players are not restricted on the number of tables they could join. Let them compete for the points.

I perceive this restriction as an obstacle that impedes wide participation of players in the tournament. In stark contrast to other tournaments like the BBC and the WEC, only FTC has this restriction. The FTC probably was intended to work as the Official Monthly Cups where any player is supposed to be at a single table at any given time. This implicit restriction in the Official Monthly Cups is adequate for that specific tournament because it relies on a rather physical impediment: you cannot be at two or more different tables simultaneously, at least not through "normal use" of the PokerTH software. For the sake of the argument, we are assuming that doing such a thing is impossible. However doing the same for the FTC is impractical in at least the following ways:

  • It reduces partcipation by forbidding players to participate at more than one table per tournament during a period of 5 weeks.
  • It puts a burden on our admins by requiring them to verify lists of players who have participated in previous tables. This is error prone and inconvenient.
  • The admin of a table cannot be admin of a second table in the same tournament.
  • Additionally, consider the fact that not enough players join the lobby to form a table, even though many players may subscribe. If players do not subscribe, it makes the problem even worse.

By eliminating such restriction, we would be closer to reach Objective 1: The FTC must be a tournament that promotes participation. We may also be closer to objective 3: The FTC should be easy to organize.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

04 Aug 2013 02:34 #15900 by darts501
darts501 replied.
jcwarriorOBb expressed not only my ideas, but made additional tournament objectives VERY realistic and VERY clear. Excellent post jcwarriorOBb! :)

The following user(s) said Thank You: jcwarriorOBb, Ghost__

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • I-knew-it
  • I-knew-it's Avatar Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
04 Aug 2013 18:23 #15912 by I-knew-it
I-knew-it replied.

I will propose here my new idea for the Fibonacci event.
? The name of the event

I don't really care about the name of the event, i just want to have Fibonacci in it.
Of course the rules and number related to Fibonacci following will have my priority.

? When ?

This will depends on our final structure, admins disponibilities, etc.

? How many table ?

This depends on the disponibility of the admins.
I have nothing against 2 tables.
More than that, in case of real success!!

? Cup or Championship

After some thinking, i think that this can only be a championship.
Otherwise, we will still have the actual problem and the participation will stay too low.

Some other events already exist, BBC, WEC, i don't want a copy.

? How to create a reliable championship

Here we arrive on the hard task...
As you knew for exemple in football, at the start of a national championship, you have maybe 15 teams.
The championship longs for 1 year.

No other team can rejoin the championship during this year.

And here we have our problem !
We cannot select people who will be able to play the FTC, it's not fair and i don' like this idea.

So what can we do ?

I think that, first, we have to determine how long time a championship must run.
And then, we will be able to determine how many time a player can play a FTC table along that championship.

Why this restriction ?

Because if we don't put this restriction in place, we will have the same players all the time and the FTC would have no reason to exists...

This is an idea... of course, here we are just giving idea, nothing is established

? The Table Settings

Some people told me that the blinds were getting big a little too fast, here is a new proposal that respect jcwarriorOBb idea :

Starting Stack: 4450
Players: 10
Duration: 2 hours
           Blind Structure
Level  Time(min)  Small Blind  Big Blind  Running Time
1      8          25           50         0:08
2      8          30           60         0:16
3      8          40           80         0:24
4      8          50           100        0:32
5      8          75           150        0:40
6      8          100          200        0:48
7      8          150          300        0:56
8      8          200          400        1:04
9      8          250          500        1:12
10     8          300          600        1:20
11     8          400          800        1:28
12     8          500          1000       1:36
13     8          600          1200       1:44
14     8          800          1600       1:52
15     8          1200         2400       2:00
16     8          1500         3000       2:08
17     8          2000         4000       2:16
18     8          3000         6000       2:24
19     8          4000         8000       2:32
Created by the Blind Valet structure creator at

For the time of thinking and the time between each hand, i thought 8/8 was a good one.
Otherwise, 13/8 ? What do you think ?

? How many points for the players, on each table

We don't touch this part, it's the only perfect part :D
 1 -    34 points
 2 -    21 points
 3 -    13 points
 4 -    8 points
 5 -    5 points
 6 -    3 points
 7 -    2 points
 8 -    1 points
 9 -    1 points
10 -    0 point

? For how long time must run a Championship ?

This depends on how many table we will have each week....

I was thinking about 4 months, so 3 Championships each year.
(just an idea...)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • jcwarriorOBb
  • jcwarriorOBb's Avatar
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
04 Aug 2013 20:49 - 04 Aug 2013 20:58 #15915 by jcwarriorOBb
jcwarriorOBb replied.
darts: I am glad you liked my post. I also appreciate you are taking time to make some proposals.

I really liked your last post. I will share my views tomorrow. It is Sunday and I am going to be out today, so I have not enough time to express my views on it right now.

However I don't want to leave without posting something that is critical to the FTC and that is the selection of admins.

Some time ago you told me via private messages that you would like to select admins using register forms.

I volunteered as admin for table 1 this way. However, recruiting admins via register forms has proven to be unreliable with table 3 of the FTC. A player who decides to offer his/her help as admin must be aware that not only is going to be responsible for opening the table, but also is going to be responsible for the logs and reporting the results in the forum. Unfortunately for table 3 of the FTC, our initial volunteer admin did not even know how to open a table. MasterG84 came to the rescue and offered himself as admin for table 3 which started with only 7 players and delayed by more than a half hour.

An admin shall:
  • have a pokerth forum active account
  • configure table settings properly
  • open a table
  • invite players respecting order on the lists (players on the main list, then substitutes and finally, if players are still insufficient, players of his/her choice)
  • save and upload logfiles
  • report results of a table, providing logfile analysis links and the logfiles themselves as evidence.

Instead of asking players to volunteer as admins via register forms as it was done before, ask for players that have served as admins for either official or community events (BBC, WEC, Official Monthly Cups, etc).

I also believe we should define a minimun number of players for a table. I am proposing that a table must have at least 8 players to be considered valid. An exception of course could be made fo table 3 and only for table 3.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • I-knew-it
  • I-knew-it's Avatar Topic Author
  • Visitor
  • Visitor
04 Aug 2013 21:18 - 04 Aug 2013 21:19 #15916 by I-knew-it
I-knew-it replied.

Your ideas make sense to me jcwarriorOBb.


Thank you for this BIG support :kiss:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Aug 2013 01:36 #15921 by darts501
darts501 replied.
I think 9/7 would be an adequate time for a hand. I play a daily night "rabbit game" and those are his settings. It gives sufficient time to think your play through-not too long and not too short.
I cannot help in the administrative aspects of the game as I don't keep log files. My friend krrreuh said I was either paranoid or ignorant of keeping unwanted data on my hard drive and I responded by saying I am a technological MORON! :laugh:

The following user(s) said Thank You: Ghost__

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Champions of

PokerTH - live

The PokerTH spectator tool.

Member Login

NOTE! This site uses cookies and similar technologies.
Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information

We use cookies to personalize content and ads to offer features for social media and analyze the number of hits on our website. We also provide information about your use of our website to our partner for social media, advertising and analysis on.