And I can't think of any where that re-entry would make a larger prize pool for the other competitors, so I don't think the comparison is all that fitting.

Comparing a player funded prize pool to sponsor funded pools doesn't fit all that well either.

Yeah, but still, it attracts players. Personally, I prefer the one-time buy-in, but it does suck to drive two hours and bust early.

How are joeschmoe and the other ******s not getting this?

There's really no difference between person A busting then rebuying, and person A busting, leaving, and then having person B to come to buy in.

When someone busts then rebuys, there is no real difference between that and someone completely different buying in. While it is true that it may influence the play slightly, to say this structure gives a tangible advantage to those who can afford to rebuy in terms of PROFIT is just ******ed.

ya dont u hate it when u go all-in with AA n some bigshot pro calls with 72o.
whats even worse is when u get AA 17x in a row n everytime u go all-in that same ******* picks up 72o n decides to gamble with u.
soooooooooooooo tilting.

Whatever valid points could be made (and perhaps have been made after the post I quoted as I have not yet read further) are not this.

The chance for Person A's AA to be crushed by Person B's 72o should be welcomed and not feared by Person A regardless of how many times Person A and/or Person B are planning to re-buy.

You are confusing the issue.
True it doesn't matter (to you) which you play against, either one player who rebuys or two different players that buy in once.

But that point is totally unrelated to your last sentence.... "to say...this structure gives a tangible advantage to those who can afford to rebuy... is ******ed."

------------
Lets assume player B (Brian) is an idiot. He can't play poker. He can't spell poker... But he has tons of money to blow off.
Do you not agree that his rebuying again and again after busting gives him an distinct advantage?

btw.. You used "******" twice in that short post. Thesaurus.com is your friend.

Your AA will not win 17 times in a row. You will be on the rail. The 72o pro will be stacking your chips and looking for another mark.

making moves and showing bluffs with 72o is what poker is all about loll

Correct. I'm glad we agree that comparing multiple entry poker tournaments to any other competition doesn't make a lot of sense.

LOL, what? It wouldn't have to; once it held up the first couple of times, you could run 50/50 with it and the pro will be on that rail, and the prize pool much larger. But you won't be all-in with AA against other pros with 72o 17 times in a tournament anyway, rebuys or not.

But using this extreme example, it seems pretty simple to me. Obviously getting it all-in with AA vs 72o 17 times is hugely +EV for you. The question is whether the pro's skill advantage is enough to make up for all the EV he gave away.

Same goes for any pro who plays sub-optimally, planning to double up or rebuy. If his skill level is high enough to make up for the EV he gives up with early sub-optimal play, then allowing him to rebuy is -EV for everyone else. If it isn't, then the rebuys are +EV for everyone else.

The pro isn't getting an extra advantage over anyone else here.

This is also to riverboatking too.
Obviously the pairing of the best and worst hands are theoretical to differing hand ranges. But when a pro has the cash to rebuy and play any suited cards, any paint, w/e. and I have jut sattied in as a recreational player, its usually an eventuality that one of, and as stated there will be many, the pros who have a much wider range, will get there in a hand against my tighter play as I cannot rebuy. I can't see why anyone cannot grasp this, perhaps it's just forum rules to argue and 'one up each other', but I question if we were all there with our BR, who would be firing what number of bullets.

Invite only $5k SNG for everyone ITT, we'll make it a rebuy so it's worth your travel ok?

The chips that are rebought do not know who owns them.
For all pratical purposes, they, the "rebought chips" are a new player.

A strategic disadvantage might be to the "rebought chips" because they missed out on hands that they could have built an edge with. (early play is poor)

The avoidance of conflict that the "rebought chips" have by not being required to play from the beginning probably has very little effect, so far from the bubble.

The real difference between the player that will rebuy and the one who will not is that the latter is committed. Not re-buying is restrictive and limiting.

The other is free to choose his actions in any specific situation. He has a much wider range in the general sense of the word. I see this as a big advantage.

But what if they don't bust out with the first buy-in?! Or what if they don't bust after 3 buy-ins.

Let's look at 5 tournaments with different results and average them.

3 buy-ins
9 buy-ins
1 buy-in
2 buy-ins
5 buy-ins
______________
So,,,,

20 buy-ins at 20%
VS
5 buy-ins at 50%

Not
10 to 1
But
4 to 1

And more likely,,,

2 buy-ins
5 buy-ins
1 buy-in
3 buy-ins
1 buy-ins
______________

12 buy-ins at 20% = 220
VS
5 buy-ins at 50% = 250

2.4 to 1


Great news is that more FISH can say that they busted YOU in a tournament.

While allowing you to feel good about making the trip.

ur absolutely right. the last thing anyone wants to do is give some idiot who doesnt know how to play the opportunity to blow off a ton of money by playing bad hands and rebuying.

oh ok cool. for awhile you had me going the way you were pretending to be a HUGE moron, but clearly ur just a really dedicated troll. well played.

edit: how about this prop joe. we play a HUSNG with unlimited rebuys forever but ur the only one who can rebuy. everytime u rebuy the $$$ is added to the prizepool n we play winner take all. we both start with 10K in chips n each rebuy u get an additional 10K (u can only rebuy when u bust).
i'll give u 10% juice on the entry.
only stipulation is i get AA everyhand u get 72o every hand n we go all-in every hand. the SNG can go on until u win or run out of $$$.
u cant lose right?

The #1 issue with re-entry tournaments is that it makes the field in the endgame much tougher. When the top pros are firing as many bullets as they can, and the satellite winner or recreational player is firing an expected value of between 1 and 2 bullets, the field becomes way tougher.

In the final few tables, the fact that there are so few soft spots left means that the rec players have fewer chances to take chips from each other to get to where the big money is, and have to beat out a tough few tables of top pros.

In the long run, I believe the effect is that more rake goes to the casino, the recreational players' -EV is more diluted among the casino and the pros, rec players have a lesser chance of winning and entering future big buyin tournaments where they are -EV, and nobody benefits, except the casinos.

They should change it so you have to pay double the buy in each time you want to re-enter.

not if only represents .01% of an effective...

Your crazy manufactured scenario doesn't change the fact that the rebuyers have a weapon you lack.

but the non rebuyer has 2 weapons you lack

And what might those be?

this is gonna be hilarious... i just know it.. so be prepared to lol.

This is just...I cant even.

A quote from a baseball player from the 50's?

Really?

Why, WHY, would you think that would help your argument, here, on this poker forum, while people are discussing math?

Unbelievable Joe, unbelievable.

And what if I suck?

What advantage does re-buying/re-entering the maximum amount of times get me if, when the re-entry/re-buy period ends, I'm so bad at poker that I can't possibly beat the remaining field without getting very lucky?


It seems joe, that you are forgetting a simple concept; this isn't investment banking or venture capital, your money does not work for you in poker. You have to be skilled at the game of poker to win (in the long term of course), not just mathematically inclined.


PS.

Just so you don't get confused, in this post, I am arguing specifically against your "aa vs 72o 17 times" argument.

Yes. It is also not a disadvantage if you only play one bullet. Playing two bullets does not change your EV or ROI.

If re-entry is stupid than playing more than one tournament in your life is stupid as well.

That said there is certainly an effect on player composition which has an overall effect how beatable the games is. I am not sure if it positive or negative. The borgata mentioned tournament before with 3.7k players (yes my 5k was exaggerated) is a perfect example.

i dont want to speak for him but id guess he was referring to intelligence and common sense.