Originally Posted by
DonaldTrumpsHairPiece
If they had to add days to get the $250k so be it, what the heck do you want instead, sorry guys only at $190k so too bad. Then youd complain they didn't market enough or something like that. The numbers required to achieve $250k are the numbers, no matter how many days or players it didn't change the requirement to get there.
The fact the club even exists is a + and anyone who bitches about $100 shouldn't be gambling because clearly you cannot afford to lose.
Flame suit on!... no flame suit off, I'm a man and would rather be set a blaze bare flesh.
That's a bad way to approach your attitude about guarantees and add-ons, and pretty much "guarantees" the house is going to fuck you repeatedly.
The whole point of a guarantee is to GUARANTEE that the prize pool will be, at minimum, a certain amount, regardless of how many entries they get.
It does NOT mean the casino can just keep adding flights until they can get enough entries to meet the guarantee. That defeats the whole purpose of a guarantee in the first place.
A guarantee benefits the casino because it draws people to the tournament, who otherwise may not have played it.
A guarantee benefits the players because they will play with extra money in the prize pool if the number of players wouldn't have otherwise caused the pool to be as large as the guarantee -- known as an "overlay".
As I've said countless times, "If your casino can't afford to risk there being an overlay, then don't run guaranteed tournaments!"
By running guarantee tournaments and then adding flights until the number of entrants prevents an overlay, the casino is taking all of the upside of the situation (people playing for the guarantee) with none of the downside (risk of an overlay). That's complete bullshit. And if they're going to operate this way, they need to disclose it from the start.
Furthermore, the $100 add-on thing sucks because it doesn't go into the prize pool.
It's not about whether you can afford to lose $100.
It's that you're paying another $100 in rake, causing the actual rake of the tournament to be 33%, which is horrendous.
Sounds like you're making excuses for the casino.
I especially hate the attitude of, "If you can't afford to lose XXXX, then don't do YYYY", in regards to something unfair/stupid/shady.
Reminds me of one time there was a hospital billing error for $120. They wouldn't fix it, and I had tons of arguments with them over the phone. Finally a woman there said to me, "Your bill is $560, so even if we remove the $120, it's still $440. So if you can afford to pay $440, clearly you can afford to pay $560, so what's the big deal?"
I responded with, "If $120 isn't a big deal, then you pay the $120 for me, and I'll drop this right now."
She screamed at me, "Why should I pay your $120? I don't owe it!"
I said, "I don't owe it, either. And that's why I won't pay. Get it now?"
Believe it or not, that actually got through to her, and she adjusted off the $120.