Goto page Previous  1, 2 View previous topic :: View next topic  
Straight Flush

Joined: 12 May 2010
Posts: 3061
Location: nil fhios agam

PostPosted: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:18 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
darrensprengers wrote:
stowjon wrote:
darrensprengers wrote:
if you are playing a tournament and cannot afford to rebuy in the next day 1 then you are not using correct bank roll management and should play smaller tournaments. this approach will clearly favour real poker players using correct bank roll managements in tournaments they feel they have an edge it at the entry level they can afford.

the point about travel costs is relevant as you are effectively entering two tournaments out of your planned schedule.

Bank roll management? what is this thing you speak of Mr. Green

A good point made my friend but what about recreational players who have satted in and are just away to have a jolly for a couple of nights, who think they have done well because all but a few PRO'S have been knocked out before them only to find the next day that they are sitting on the same table as 4-5 pro's that had been knocked out and now have another shot at kicking the recreationalist in the nads and knock them out?

if they paid double and got double the starting stack i might muster a complaint but they start both days at the same starting stack so i dont see the difference between it being two different people or the same one. the other one is late rebuys and if phil ivey wants to buy in with a 3rd or less of my stack size i would not be overly worried.

you are really asking the question does getting knocked out by a player already knocked out unbalance the universe and it fairness system. the answer is no. however hard done by you feel and look for an excuse to moan


But also- any recreational player would have to be beyond worry-worth if they didn't see that the tourmanent they've bought into and they're playing is a re-buy. Pros re-buy and rec players re-buy. Both think they have a good reason when they fork over the money. It often doesn't work out for either category. Poker.
"I find it's best to start the day with no composure and then you've got nothing to lose." B. Boatman

Joined: 22 Oct 2008
Posts: 124
Location: Belfast

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 2:40 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
I don't think Mike can be faulted for pitching the advantages and I certainly get the point about expenses for players doing the circuit.

However, that's not me. I only go to 1 or 2 events a year, so let me try and get this straight in my head (from an amateur 1 entry not re-entering players point of view)

If I sat in, then a re-entry (bigger percentage of "the field" cashing) is probably better for me as I got in for very little, so even a min cash is a nice result?

If I buy in for cash, a straight freezeout would be better as others can't work a potential re-entry edge (pressure me knowing they can afford to re-enter) and the return would be better if I do cash?

A re-buy is the worst of both as deep pocketed players get to bully me?

Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 108
Location: Lurking

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:34 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Alex B wrote:

for the "75%" who don't re-enter, the only difference between players who re-enter on day 2, and a freeze-out which had a 25% bigger field on day 1, is that in the former we know that the additional players are from a population who bust from tournaments on day 1. That sounds to me like an advantage to the "75%"

The players who bust on day 1 are likely to be weaker than average. However, if the buyin is significant, I think the players who bust on day 1 and have the means and inclination to re-enter on day 2 are probably going to be stronger than average.

Although there will be more money in the prize pool there are more chips in play so the value of your stack is not affected. However, the field will be more pro-heavy when the day 1s are combined, reducing your expected return.
Alex B
Straight Flush

Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 2856
Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 8:39 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
1) Compared with a $100 freeze-out with 100 runners and $10 fee (=$1000).

2) e-buy is like a $300 freeze-out with 100 runners and $10 fee (=$1000).

3) Re-entry is like a $100 freeze-out with 125 runners and $10 fee (=$1250).

(2) is best value for players in terms of fee% of prize pool.
(3) makes most money for organisers.
(3) is preferred by many players due to bigger prize fund.

All the other differences are too small to get stressed about. If the players re-entering on day 2 would just wear disguises no-one would be superstitious about who bust them.

Ask yourself if you would prefer to play a freeze-out with a bigger field or a smaller field, and you can decide if you prefer re-entry or regular.

Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 177

PostPosted: Fri Aug 24, 2012 1:25 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
kungfu panda wrote:

While Mike says it benefits the players who play the live circuit as it reduces their travel expenses by being able to play in the next main event the following day at the same venue, I would question this as being a benefit to all the players in the tournament. I would contest that it only benefits those that can afford and opt to do so. Whilst it does give those players that have travelled to the event the chance to stay involved is it really good for the game? It may be good for the business, but for the game I dont think so. If 25% of the players eliminated on day 1a rebuy what does it say about the other 75% (the majority)?

In our last Deepstack the number that re-entered was almost 70% so I would say that it benefitted the majority.

kungfu panda wrote:

Giving players a second shot at the main event only benefits those that wish to avail of it and the operators. It does not, in my opinion, benefit those who did not avail of this facility as they may find themselves up against a player they already took a gamble with and eliminated earlier on in the tournament and then have this same player eliminate them from the tournament, possibly at a key stage of it, like the bubble. The only benefit I can see to these players is that it does increase the prize fund for them. With regards to the prize pool distribution I think players are entitled to, and want, better prizes when they make the money and this is something that is not as cut and dry as Mike may think. To sit and play an event for 2, 3 or 4 days or more, only to receive a sum slightly more than originally invested is not, I think, everyones idea of good value and a worthwhile endeavour.

Re-entries have no bearing on the payout structure. We always try and make a min cash as near to double the initial entry as possible anyway. This is of course double the initial entry without taking into account any re-entries.

The argument about coming up against the same player has been covered already. In my opinion the majority of people who bust early enough to re-enter tend to be weaker players so when this happens you should be happy to see a weak player with more chips for you to obtain.

kungfu panda wrote:

I do understand that hosting these events is expensive for the operator and why they encourage the re-entry system to help cover their overheads, but is it good for the game? My answer would have to be No.

In trying to give some justification to the re-entry system let me just make the following point. The game is changing and not necessarily for the better with the introduction of certain rules. Poker tournaments are no longer only about providing prize pools to be won or lost, they are about entertainment and there are costs that are incurred in providing this form of entertainment which the industry standard of 10% no longer cuts it in low level tournaments (less than 500 buy-in) and the players that try to make a living from the game have got to understand this. In the days gone by traditionally poker tournaments were held in casinos and they were looked upon as loss leaders to get the punters in and hopefully they would migrate to the cash games or more importantly the gaming tables. With the emergence of operators like D4 Events the tournaments were taken out of this environment and hosted in hotels or similar venues and so the operator had to make these profitable by increasing the reg. fees substantially more than the casinos were charging and also encouraging side events and side games (cash games) to make their business profitable. This does not always work out for the operator, if they dont get the side events or more importantly the side games they have no other way of covering their overheads never mind make a profit and so they look for new ways of covering their overheads and hence the emergence of the re-entry tournament, an understandable but not necessarily good change to the game.

Re-entry tournaments do not add anything to the profitability of the tournament but if if they encourage more players to travel they will help with the overall profitability of the festival. Most of our tournaments run at break-even (if we did charge more reg & use faster structures this might not be the case) and a re-entry player adds as much to the cost for each of their entries as one who does not.

To sum up in my experience so far re-entries have more fans than detractors and in a business we have to cater for the majority to survive.

A player who is properly rolled for the level of event and will not hesitate to re-enter has an advantage to any recreational player or other player who cannot/will not use the re-entry option. This advantage is there whether the event is re-entry or not as in most cases they tend to be the better poker players.
European Short-Handed Poker Championships
26th - 30th September. Europe's biggest 6 max tournament.
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Hendon Mob Forum Index -> Mob Poker Forum All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum