If you don't have 5, you play your best "cards".
It should even itself out over the duration of the contest. I tend to shy away from letting people use any stable, because some residents only have a small handful and it wouldn't be fair against someone with 12 or whatever.
Some weeks you'll have more than 5, sometimes not.
Should I add a 3rd stable? Most have at least 3 stables.
Should I open it to any track?
**New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
NWRC Stables: sledge4 | wbrv | camry | rycamkel
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:30 pm
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
I haven't had a lot of time to check this out but it seems as if having to get 5 entries from 2 barns running at NWRC tracks is too limited. How about everyone enter 3 barns (must be NWRC resident barns) and run at any track. With those conditions in mind I don't think trainers should be able to buy races for this contest. Makes it tooo easy and people that dont buy races wouldn't really have a chance. Just a few thoughts. Rich
-
- 5 lb Apprentice
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:19 pm
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
what about if a person can not find a team mate and has only 1 stable?
My self I could use both my stables.
My self I could use both my stables.
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:00 am
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
I say go w/ 3 stables. 2 is too few to make a good "hand". 

Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
i'm in different type of contest sure would be intertesting
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
oh and I like lilbit's idea. run three barns but no buying or bid races. Play it straight if you will with no wilds
real man's poker lol

Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em

Just a thought
Ron
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
I'm fine with solo or team participation. The only reason I did solo entrant is to get the numbers up.
If we had 10 members play and we did teams, in effect we only have 5 entries. But if it meant someone playing vs not playing, i'm ok with someone partnering. But the team would have to decide how to split the credits. Does the person with 2 stables get 66% of the winnings? The answer is probably yes, but it's just a point to be made.
If we had 10 members play and we did teams, in effect we only have 5 entries. But if it meant someone playing vs not playing, i'm ok with someone partnering. But the team would have to decide how to split the credits. Does the person with 2 stables get 66% of the winnings? The answer is probably yes, but it's just a point to be made.
NWRC Stables: sledge4 | wbrv | camry | rycamkel
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
Revisiting this contest again. Maybe some changes based on feedback. Also updated the prizes.
Let me know your thoughts.
Will
Let me know your thoughts.
Will
NWRC Stables: sledge4 | wbrv | camry | rycamkel
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:00 am
Re: **New Contest** NWRC Hold'em
I'm in but prefer NWRC races only to make it a little more difficult to get 5 aces 
