Interesting. Are they not noting down chip stacks for players that this could possibly be done by somebody and not noticed?

And I agree with Mike about re entries as well. Should be limited to maybe 1 re entry at best.

i think it would be pretty hard to try and smuggle chips from one day to the next. but i do think he is spot on that all these reentry tournaments are bad for poker. i mean yeah they create way bigger prizepools but like he says if you gotta knock Ivey out 7-8 times it makes it way harder for the recreational players to win and they are the ones that will put the money back into the poker community. if Ivey wins no one is ever going to touch that money, except Ivey.

I can see this point. However, superstars attract fish too and it's unlikely that this tournament would attract many big names if it didn't have the prize pool and rebuy options that it does.

Agree with Mike 100% about the re-entry thoughts. Yes, Phil Ivey has a lot invested with 7 bullets but ultimately his aggressive style will get him lots of chips most likely. What's $35,000 to Ivey when 1st place is near $3,000,000???

IMO hurts the game when the "high rollers" can "gamble" it up more to build a stack while the avg player can only play 1 bullet and most likely be much more careful.

In the end, all this re-entry crap benefits 95% of the time is the Phil Iveys' and Daniel Negreanus' of the world and benefits the casinos' profit margin 100% of the time.

^^ Said by someone who re-entered 12 times in a tournament one time.

Please, it was a $330 buy-in, not a 5k or 10k or 25k and the person putting me in allowed me to do that. Plus the last re-entry on day 1c finally allowed me to get a huge chip stack which propelled me to the final table. If I had not gotten coolered by set over set I had a real good chance to win the thing. What I was able to do is exactly the problem of these kinds of events.

Regardless, I would prefer a tournament with ZERO re-entries believe it or not or just 1 entry per day. Hard to bluff someone that can buy in "12 times" and totally changes the game.

1 more quick point - I used the strategy of re-entering that the $330 buy-in allowed - not hating Phil or Daniel or whomever else that can do it because the rules allow them to re-enter over and over. I just don't think it is good for the game and would prefer it wouldn't be allowed, that's all.

re-entries are raked every time which just makes them a big scam

i am shocked - i agree with 100% of what mike the mouth says!

Doesn't the value of a chip decrease as blinds go up?

Sort of off-topic, but Matusow was awesome yesterday. In that interview he talked about a few other topics (which are being saved for another video), so it took up about half of his break. Immediately afterward a handicapped guy (I think he had cerebral palsy) asked for a picture, and Mike spent some time taking pictures and talking to him. I think he had like 3 minutes to himself when it was all done.

DN is well known for being nice about that stuff, but Mike deserves some credit too.

Pretty sure the ballroom doesn't have cameras either which would make this even more possible.

50% of something is better than 100% of nothing.

Don't understand why re-entries are bad.

Can sosome explain this to me mathematically.

Re-entries do create large fields and give players the ability to play several times.

Now you can argue that better players are going to take advantage of this more than weaker players.

At the same time better players should bust less frequently than weaker player so I feel there are kinda two forces working against each other. If not they ar e probably not playing optimally, which again is good for bad players.

Also I feel there are many factors such as the fact that the ability to play more entries is kinda like offering several tournaments which increases the liquidity which is a big part of what is important for the poker economy.

Unless re-entries are bad for beat-ability they can only be good. I don't see how less money is going to players with more re-entries. So I don't understand right now why they should be bad.

Would like to hear more about the chip smuggling. Pretty sure this is common when players go deep in a small tourney and use the big chips in high buyin events

assumption: good players are more likely to re-enter than bad players

the math: If you had a coin that was weighted 60/40 to heads, and were allowed to bet heads on only one flip, you are in a theoretically profitable position but with high variance. If you are allowed to bet heads over and over again, you will win with 100% certainty over the long run. Apply this principle to reentry tournaments.

Could be solved by having different chips each day. Of course i don't know if that is feasible or profitable for the casino but it seems an easy fix.

Mike is the Nuts...and is Nuts...but that's a story for another time.

I agree with most of what he said....all these multiple reentry tournaments benefit players with big rolls and the casino.

Rec players are left out in the cold taking 1 or 2 shots with their limited roll.

Add to that the possibility of smuggling chips by unscrupulous players (is Men the Master playing this?)....and it adds up to "bad for poker" IMO

i think that with multiple same day bullets, high rollers can sit there flicking it in blind every hand, whereas the recreational players have to value their buy in, only to have Mr high roller knock them out because he fancied a gamble and can afford the numerous reloads. I think that 1 BI per day and 4 or 5 day ones would ease this massively.

Re entry's most likely make it easier for rec players. 1 being tney can have a few buyins to run hot or just keep buyin back In until tney get cards. 2nd lets use the post it's harder to knock Phil Ivey out 7 times. Well if Ivey is rebuying 7+ times I'm sure he's trying to chip up and not getting his money in great every time. In a way its leveling tne playing field(huge stretch i know but think it has some validity)This could benefit A rec player with only 1 or 2 bullets. It has it's advantages and disadvantages, I don't think it's better or worse. For some reason tne first thing I thought of is "move up to where they respect your raise". If people are getting in theirs money light i don't see why Otner people are complaining. I understand tournaments are a different animal but it's not all bad

Think about it this way. Would you rather play a tournie with 1k people or 650 with rebuys that has a total of 1k buyins. Ill take the rebuy with 1 billet becaue the first rounds i have a better chance of someone doubling me up

or a better chance of having the AA you were waiting for crushed by the 72o by the person who's re-bought the last 14 hands.

No, but in anything but winner-take-all tournaments, the mathematical equity value of each chip decreases as you get more chips, because you don't win all the prize money if you get all the chips.

However, for a pro there is also value to having a big stack, in terms of 1.) bullying 2.) deeper stacks means you can play more implied odds hands and have more shots at finding profitable spots 3.) when you find those spots, you can make more from them

Many players with a LAG-type style are at a pretty big disadvantage if they can't chip up early because they can't threaten their opponent's TOURNAMENT LIVES!!1!!!!1!!1 So they hate to see a bunch of huge stacks getting built because a few rich pros decide to gambool it up.

Plus see my previous post for a more detailed analysis.

Personally, I'm just as happy playing a TAG, shorter-stack style, letting the LAGs and degens throw a bunch of money into the prize pool, and taking my chances with my one or two bullets. With a little luck these can be very profitable spots.

Play tournaments where they respect your raise again it has it advantages and disadvantages .

um no. a lot of recreational players satellited in and only have one bullet. a lot of rec players either don't have the roll or just won't buy into a $5k tournament more than once. sure if you are playing $100 re entry it wouldn't matter to most but that isn't the case here. people that can fire off multiple bullets will sometimes take a shot trying to get chips that they might not take if they couldn't re-enter.