Rush On Demand Tournaments - A love and hate thing

Recently, a number of people who frequent the GNF Forum have been posting up some really good results on Full Tilts 'Rush Poker On Demand' tournaments. This led me to spend a great deal of time over the xmas break grinding this format of game to see what the fuss is about. I thought I would share some of my initial thoughts here.

For those that don't know, Rush Poker is the innovative format of poker whereby instead of being allocated to a table, you form part of a large 'pool' of players who are allocated a table on a hand-by-hand basis. Therefore if you are done with your hand you 'quick fold' and are instantly reassigned a table and receive a new hand. This creates fast and furious action all the way to the final table, which reverts to normal structure. This has been around some time now, however the latest advancement is the concept on Full Tilt of 'On Demand' tournaments, which are essentially Sit-and-Go tournies, that start when a predetermined number of people register but crucially allow a period of late registration (like regular MTTs). This creates larger player pools and thus larger prize pools. The vast majority of these tournaments running at the moment are $4 or $11 buy-in (with the occasional $24 one), and whilst they start with 45 players, they usually end up with 150-250, and generally complete in around 2hrs.

From playing them over the holiday period, I have found them frustrating and fun in equal measure, and whilst I have doubts over their validity for skill improvement of players, I can see how they can be profitable (especially if you run good!). But it is a bit of a love/hate thing, so thats how I will break it down...

Things I love about Rush On-Demand

1. Availability. The On Demand format has seemingly constant stream of tournaments. I have yet to find a time where I couldn't jump into one. That, naturally is both a good and bad thing. Good from a time management perspective, but bad from a bankroll perspective if you are running particularly badly or are tilted.

2. The speed of the tournament. The format and structure means you can get deep (or get knocked out) fairly quickly. You tend to know if you are going on a deep run before the first hour is out. Contrast with normal tourneys where you can play for 3 or 4 hours and leave with nothing. The game slows down when the FT is reached of course, and can often take as long as the preceding 'rush' element. Not that you mind at that stage however, as you are in the money.

3. Lack of chatbox action. Refreshing lack of shit-talking in the chatbox as there is no time as the table changes, and besides as soon as people have folded their avatar is still displaying but they are away on another table in their next hand. This does make a welcome change from all the rubbish usually spouted during a tournament!

4. You are harder to pick up on. No history (until near the FT), makes stealing and aggresion much more profitable and less likely to be picked up on, and whilst I believe online tools for stat gathering/display do exist for rush tournaments, I find it hard to see that most will be able to make any sensible use of this before the final table due to the pace of the game.

5. Lots of mistakes. Less time for decisions forces people into big mistakes against concealed hands and the sheer number of available games makes people 'gamble' a lot more. This is very much evident during the first 50% of the tournament but evens out later. Whilst this is a good thing, it can also be frustrating as the amount of suck-outs and rivered winners seems far higher than in a regular tournament.

6. Quick chip accumulation. If you can build a big stack quickly, accumulating chips seems rather easier than in a regular tournament. Partly I think because, with people being more selective about hands to play, they will be quicker to shy away from a confrontation with an aggro big stack than in a regular tourney where they may not get another opportunity for some time. The counter argument also exists - if you play too tight, or get decimated by a lost pot, then you will face almost constant aggression and you will be forced to gamble sooner than you may like.

Things I hate about Rush On-Demand

1. Tilt! It is far too easy to tilt with this format. There is precious little time to re-group thoughts and composure, especially after losing a pot to a bad beat or making an erroneous big call. For this reason, the format can be a big money-spewer....in many ways the opposite to a 'double or nothing' tournament format (although you would have to be lobotomised in order to be able to withstand the boredom of grinding that format, in my opinion).

2. Big Blind Shenanigans. I have had situations where I have ended up on the Big Blind multiple hands in a row. This has only seemed to happen when I have been relatively shortstacked, and when the blinds are higher this can be immensely frustrating. In a regular tournament you can strategise in terms of picking your moments to push, but this is impossible here. Conversely, the times I have done well I seem have to have been in mid/late position a lot when I receive the good hands. I'm guessing it is supposed to balance out ultimately, but it never feels like that at the time.

3. High Variance. Variance is VERY high, partly due to the turbo structure, partly because you don't build up any knowledge of your table, partly due to fish shoving all in at any chance they get in earlier levels and partly because of the mechanism (lots more hands and people can be more selective) resulting in big hands such as AA,KK,QQ clashing more often. This does make the format feel like a video game sometimes.

4. Not 'real' enough. The feeling that no matter how much you play it, or how well you are doing, that you simply are not playing 'proper' poker. The real skill edge in poker is post-flop, and through much of these tournaments, you are not exposed to these in the same way you are with deepstack poker. It can certainly help you get better in some aspects of the game, but after playing this structure for a number of days, I was yearning for a long-haul deepstack game to slowly chip up in.

5. Addictive. This format is extremely addictive. Far more so that regular poker, where the time investment can often decide when a session ends. This is bad enough when you don't have a problem - but some people do.

So, to summarise - Rush Poker On-Demand tournies are a great deal of fun, and can be very useful if you are on a limited time schedule, however the variance can be brutal and it is often too tempting to play larger games than your bankroll allows for. This is one of my big leaks in general. I am absolutely sure that if you deploy good bankroll management, then this format can be profitable long-term, however from a personal perspective, I'd prefer to keep this game as a sideline to MTTs/STTs to help blow off a bit of steam. Your mileage may vary.

Kudos to Full Tilt for introducing something that is genuinely innovative into the poker landscape though.