PokerTH

Hello,

Here is an analysis of the settings of games in ranking with AI.

Start cash : 10 000
First small blind : 50
Blinds raise interval: 11 hands
Blinds raise mode : double blinds
Timing : 5sec Action / 5sec Hand delay

List of levels:
Level 1: 50 / 100
Level 2: 100 / 200
Level 3: 200 / 400
Level 4: 400 / 800
Level 5: 800 / 1,600
Level 6: 1,600 / 3,200
Level 7: 3,200 / 6,400
Level 8: 6,400 / 12,800
Level 9: 12,800 / 25,600
Level 10: 25,600 / 51,200

With the small blind doubling every 11 hands, the pressure is extremely high.
Too fast: Even an extreme turbo doesn't double blinds that often.

Impossible game: From level 5 (55 hands) onwards, BB = 100 × 2⁴ = 1,600 → default stack = 6.25 BB → already in push/fold mode.

The game becomes unmanageable from level 6 onwards (3,200 BB → default stack = 3.1 BB).

BB stack analysis at level 6 with 4 players
----------------------------------------

Player with 40,000: 12.5 BB
Player with 35,000: 10.9 BB
Player with 20,000: 6.25 BB
Player with 5,000: 1.56 BB

The top 3 have playable stacks (6 to 12.5 BB).

The real problem will come at level 7 (3,200/6,400): at that point, even 20,000 = 3.1 BB → it will be virtually impossible to play anything other than push/fold.

With 3 players remaining at level 7
---------------------------------

Blinds: 3,200 / 6,400
Stacks: 40,000, 35,000, 25,000

Analysis in number of big blinds (BB):
Player at 40,000: 6.25 BB
Player at 35,000: 5.5 BB
Player at 25,000: 3.9 BB

All have less than 10 BB, so push/fold is mandatory.

Unreasonable setup: The tournament becomes chaotic in less than an hour.

For a balanced game, doubling every 11 hands is 3 to 4 times too fast.

At level 7, even a player with 40,000 (6.25 BB) is already short-stacked. Strategic play (raises, 3-bets, bluffs) becomes virtually impossible. Even stack leaders are in survival mode from level 7 onwards.

Yes, the structure is unplayable at this stage

Strategic conclusion:
--------------------

Critical zone from level 6–7 onwards → Less than 10 BB → push/fold strategy required
Too fast for balanced play → No time to develop a strategy → Luck and aggression dominate
Extreme hyper-turbo structure → Even faster than a conventional turbo game

For 10 playable levels →Moderate blind progression or Stack ≥ 100 BB at the start

Can I say that even an extreme turbo doesn't double the blinds as often as this setup?

Yes, you can say that: even an extreme turbo doesn't double the blinds as often as in your setup.

Why?
Classic turbo tournament: levels every 5 minutes → approximately 15–25 hands
Hyper-turbo: levels every 2–3 minutes → approximately 6–12 hands
Your configuration: every 11 hands, with systematic doubling

This corresponds to a hyper-turbo pace, but with a more aggressive blind progression than most real structures.

Comparison:

Some Games (hyper-turbo) starts at 10,000 chips, BB = 100 → after 30 min: BB = 1,250 (×12.5), not ×128

Your configuration: after 66 hands (~1 hour 10 minutes), BB = 51,200 → ×512

Conclusion:
-----------
Your configuration is faster than most extreme turbos. Doubling every 11 hands is very rare, even in hyper-turbo.

For 10 playable levels, a stack of 20,000 to 50,000 would be more appropriate.
A balanced structure uses a gentle (x1.5) or linear progression to avoid sudden deviations.

Your setup is too fast for a strategic game.
It favors luck, speed, and push/fold, at the expense of thoughtful poker.
Suitable for fun and fast-paced play, but not viable for ranking games.

Unreasonable setup: The tournament becomes chaotic in less than an hour.

wow !

What do you think ?

Supraglider wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2026 11:32 pm What do you think ?

Regarding all your posts/"proposals" (also in BBC shoutbox): I do think that you are heavily bored. It has a touch of passive aggression imho.

What really disturbs me: with your last posts you only indirectly complain about the current situation - without any concrete/better idea to discuss about.
As for now I do only see an indirect expectation to change things, which has to be done by others (not you) = the dev-team.
That is not really constructive - it's a one way system only - and it annoys me a bit.