Please help me with a NLHE home game...it's evolved into something weird.

I have to agree with you that it's a very strange set of rules. The funny thing is that it was even stranger before I started playing. The guy that hosts the tournament basically made up rules as he went along. I guess I shouldn't have put in the caveat of keeping the changes to a minimum, because several of the players and I have been thinking of starting our own home game with rules more in line with the norm. If that happens then there'll likely be a total revamp of the rules. I do appreciate your feedback. The disparity between starting stacks is, in my opinion, the biggest reason players don't come back. Many players, especially the casual ones, only bring $50 to play. So, even if they are on-time they still only receive 2200 chips, as opposed to $150 buy-in getting 7900 chips. Gosh, that sounds so ridiculous when I think about it. Lol, the reason for that rational was that the host wanted to REALLY encourage players to buy-in for the $150...and to be on-time XD. But, like I said, it's evolved into a bit of a $hitshow. Thank you for your feedback, sir.

You have a couple issues here:
1) Because of the format of the game, most players on any given night leave empty-handed.
2) Because the chips do not directly correspond to dollars because of your unproportional buy-in structure, someone new to the game cannot be sure the game is fair (its hard to keep track of all the buy-ins).

Does the game have to necessarily be a tournament? Judging by the amounts you guys like to buy-in for ($50-$150), you could go for a NLHE cash game with 50cent/1 dollar blinds. Then when someone is done it is very easy to cash out and you will have more players cashing out more often and coming back to the game.

Ya, I really like what VBaces recommended for payouts. If more players win, then it makes sense that more people would play.

Hmmm...This might actually be a good solution. It would certainly address the issue of chip disparity between the buy-in amounts. A $150 buy-in would grant $150 in chips. And it would take care of the other issue I have with the early-arrival chip bonus. 500 extra chips per buy-in for being on-time is too much. It's funny, when I recommended a $500 chip bonus to players that show up before the tourney starts, he agreed, but made it 500 per buy-in, lol. But, in his defense, he learned to play poker in prison and doesn't have any experience playing tournaments online or in casino's/cardrooms. Anyway, I think I'll talk to him about doing a cash game next week. I sure appreciate the feedback<3

Here's the thing buddy. You aren't smart enough to reinvent the wheel. Your structure is incredibly complicated. The complication adds nothing of value, and just creates opportunities for confusion.

Why don't you just copy standard rules for normal tournaments. The game will be simpler, the rules will be clear. Everything will be more fair and transparent.

Thank you for the suggestion, MegaWhale. You definitely have a valid point, and it's something I've wanted to do. Unfortunately, I'm a guest at this home game. And to the host, it would seem like I'm trying to reinvent the wheel if I went scorched earth on the current structure. The current state of the game, as strange as it is, finishes in 4-5 hours no matter how many people show up. And the prize pool is usually around $600 on up to $1000 plus. So, there are some things this game does right. But, in the end, it is unsustainable. I get that. It's so confusing that most new or casual players get turned off and rarely play. I actually really liked AALegends idea of switching it up to a cash game with $50 or $100 buy-ins and rebuys. It'll solve all of the issues the current game has. Because, like you said, the current structure is incredibly complicated. The cash game should get the end result I'm after. A simple structure that'll be attractive to the new/casual players while still allowing for large prize pools.

It would also seem strange to new players to a cash game having 2 fixed buying options. Just have any buyin between 50-200bb (or match the biggest stack on table), and players can add on whenever they want. Cash games suit the usually more social nature of home games more anyway as you can always rebuy if you want and there's no pressure from blinds increasing.

There is a tradeoff.
Choose either more casual friendly, or higher payouts.

Depending on variables....

Set buy-in amount at the medium ($100 level).
Stop offers for extra chips.
Allow one re-buy for the tourney, up to an appropriate level.
Flatten the payout structure.
Pay more people and pay them close to similar amounts.
Slow down the 'doubling' of the blinds.

The casual player doesn't want to get punished, cheated, or confused when showing up.

If I show up late and miss out on chips, that's not a big deal.
For some other people, they may opt to not show if they can't be on time.

If I buy in for the minimum, I have to pay more per chip than others buying in for more. It seems unnecessarily complicated/confusing.

Not everyone starts with he same amount of chips, so I don't know who may be cheating by getting larger than paid for stacks.

There are some small stakes tourneys at a local cigar shop.
Most of the time, a $25 buy-in and re-buys to a certain point.
Sometimes stakes are higher, re-buys are limited or eliminated.
There is a bounty, paid from the re-buy or prize pool if the knocked out player doesn't re-buy.
Usually someone declares they payout structure, but not always.
I don't ever go there just to play those tourneys.
I don't always join when I happen to be there.

What would make me, as a casual tourney player, join or play more often?
If I knew my cost was 'capped' at a buy-in and one re-buy.
If there weren't bounties being paid.

LIke others have said, switch to a standard buyin for all. Say $50 with rebuys and a addon. This keeps the stakes low for now so everyone can feel out the new game. I would offer an on time bonus to get guys there on time. Try a payout at 50%, 30% and 20%.

If someone offered me a chop when playing heads up, I would take it as a 50 50 split. If someone asked me if I wanted to make a deal, I would take it that we negotiate the payouts. With that said, don't make a rule on chops or deals, let the players work it out.

Given 22 minute levels and the blinds start doubling at level 4 at level 6 you are 200/400, at level 9 you are 1600/3200, and at level 12(roughly 4 1/2 hours in) you are at 12.800/25,600. Of course the game ends before level 14(roughly 5 hrs in) when they would be 51,200/102,400. Given max buy in is 7900 in chips you can see eventually the game becomes any blind is an all in bet.

I run a home game that I have evolved into a formal 'club' over the last 3 years. It follows a standard tournament structure but the differentiator is that it doesn't just payout $, it pays out points for a leaderboard over the course of a 'Season'. Points for finishes but also a point bounty on everyone's head so little chance to leave 'empty handed' without some kind of player leaderboard movement.

Right now, we are in Season 3 and each year I enhance something about it to make it better. This continued evolution has led to a range of 12-18 registered players this season with an average of 14. I pull from a list of club member that is 22 guys - so I get a good turn out %. Scheduling conflicts are the only thing that cause guys to miss.

It is a lot of admin to manage the data and obviously the lift of hosting - but it is rewarding to develop the model and the name (I have a website and everything) and see increased averages of player counts and $ paid out year over year. I even have a few guys that drive 30-40 miles one-way just for my game.

What’s the request?