I love that it was a "test" on day TWO because there was a huge overlay, if the prize pool was 5 hundo over, it would have been a daily fixture.

ps, so much so the freeroll entrys were already announced for the next day and abruptly canceled, after the huge egg in the face

you are more than welcome to foot the overlay $ that wouldve racked up had they continued to run this.

you are also welcome to apply for a tournament director position if you feel like you are gods gift to managing tournaments

I made the final table of the Pokerstars $3 rebuy 2 times in a row. There were 5,000 players each time.

Only bought in ONCE both times.

The double rebuy/add on is a sucker bet. You don't need it. Trust me. I started out thinking it was important, too. Then, you start to notice that chip leaders after the 1 1/2 hour rebuy period ends are rarely ever at the final table. The tournament is 10 hours long. What happens early on is pretty irrelevant.

The chip leaders after the rebuy period ends have about the same chance of winning as the average stacks. I was rarely ever at the top of the leaderboard after the rebuy period when I made final tables in that tourney.

I can see you don't play poker much.

I once got two toys in a Cracker Jack box, and I only bought ONE box. Buying two boxes for two toys is a sucker bet.

I can see you weren't able to make the final table with only ONE buy in. That's what I can see.

I never played that tournament, so yes, i was unable to make the final table. Simple math tells you that your EV is higher with extra chips. Either you are even with the better players or of equal skill than you, or you have the same amount of chips as the fish, and can thus win all of there chips were you might not be able to (especially early in the event) if you didn't take the available rebuy.

Further, citing "I made two final tables, thus I am right" is the same as someone winning a prize in the lotto two weeks in a row and saying "I know how to pick numbers!!!!!!" Even if your EV in that event is 100%, that's still only $3 (in the Pokerstars example) so saying your not rebuying allowed you to increase your ROI 10000000% is kind of dumb.

That explains it.

What are you talking about?


If players didn't play in it Pokerstars wouldn't run that structure 6 times a day and crush the guarantee by double each time in 2010.

That's why a $3 rebuy using the exact structure I listed above was able to reach $100,000 consistently. It's because people played in it.

A) Not a $3r
B) This isn't PokerStars in 2010.
C) Bovada, Merge and WPN all run $3rs and they are not as big as the $11's on average. (On Bovada they are way smaller, actually.)
D) Once again, this isn't PokerStars in 2010.

A)I used the $3 as an example to display the popularity and success of that structure. The $10 rebuy crushed the $45k GT, as well. They were the same tournament with different buy in amounts.

B) You yourself stated the importance of "multiple rebuys/add ons" in that structure. Clearly, the players are just as donkish here as they were on Pokerstars in 2010 and you just proved that. LOL

C) Those rebuys don't have $20k guarantees like this tourney, or follow the same structure I listed. The $10 rebuy on Stars in 2010 was $45k guaranteed. It hit $75-100k consistently.

D) Again, you proved how donkish the players are here buy insisting on the importance of multiple rebuys in that structure. Most players who play those tournaments think like you. I thought like you in 2009, too.


Why don't we get the TD to run another "test" and see?

They think they are at times.

LOL @ them having jackpot lottery sngs coming soon.

Care to explain how you don't lose EV by not taking a rebuy?

+10000

Because he final tabled that tournament twice, ldo.

I'm not saying that at all.

What I'm saying is that the EV you lose is so miniscule in a field of 2,000 ($10 rebuy)-5,000 ($3 rebuy) players that it's a waste of money trying to gain EV with rebuys.

Chip leaders under this $3r structure only had about $50-60k in chips (less in the $10 rebuy) after the rebuy period ended. While, the chip average was around $10-$15k. You needed $1-$2 million to get to the final table. Having $50-60k 1 1/2 hours into a tournament that last 10 hours doesn't do you much good. You still have about 3,000 players in the tournament to deal with and 80% of the tournament left to play. That's why the chip leaders after the rebuy period ended RARELY showed up at the final table. The statistical advantage they have is totally irrelevant.

If you play 6 rebuy tournaments a day firing in multiple rebuys/add ons the way you do because you believe you get an incredible statistical advantage you're going to piss a lot of money down the drain chasing a miniscule advantage that does virtually nothing for you.

I lost a lot of money doing this in 2009 because I thought the same way as you in these rebuys. I became much more profitable by focusing on my play during the 8 hours AFTER the rebuy period ended..not the 1 1/2 hours before.

I can see why you don't play these rebuys. You waste a lot of money with your strategy.

Twice in a row with a single buy in. The other dozen, or so times was with extra buy ins. So...

I never once made a final table by throwing in a lot of rebuys. People who do that waste money.

Nevermind.. you are too dense to discuss anything with.

What is your point? You won a rebuy after buying in a few times?

That tends to happen in rebuys from time to time. Your positive results were likely due to good play during the 7-8 hours AFTER the rebuy period ended....not to luck during the 1 1/2 hours before.

We've really derailed this discussion. This isn't about MTT rebuy strategy. It's about whether the $20k guarantee will be more likely to get hit with the 2010 Pokerstars rebuy structure over the current structure that is falling short.

I believe that it will.

You realize the exact same argument can be made for what you are saying, right?

"What is your point? You won a rebuy after buying in just once?

That tends to happen in rebuys from time to time. "

Ahhh rebuy tournaments. I'm not going to partake in this argument about Re-buy strategy, but I will say a couple things.

Like other said, this isn't PokerStars in 2010. Running a huge GTD pool in a re-buy tournament means the site is probably going to overlay, and not even get much in fees to help cover it. It doesn't make much sense to use that sort of structure. It just WILL NOT get enough players for it to make sense for WPN, neither from a direct profit standpoint nor a marketing standpoint. It just won't bring in enough players to be worth the cost.

I'm pretty confident if they pushed the schedule forward with a few big GTDs, say something like a 10+1 10K GTD, move the 28+2 to 20K and add in a 30K 69+6 I think they'd all do well within a few weeks. But I'm just spitballing and have nothing to back up my claims lmao.

^^This. If there was a $10/20K or $20/40K or whatever turbo on Sunday I'd fire that up a lot, but not really interested in a 12+ hour tourney in the 5 hour late reg current structure unless there's at least 5 figures on top.

Not to bring up the PS analogy again but if you run a $10/25K (to start) with a reasonably fast structure on a Sunday and pound the advertising and satty offerings for it I bet it would fill no problem. Just don't call it the Sunday Blizzard or something. lol

I don't see the harm in testing it out.

We already tested the $10 buy in $20k GTD with SINGLE rebuys for 5 hours, 10,000 chip stacks, and it DID NOT get enough players.

Saying that a tournament structure that offers THREE TIMES the amount of buy in opportunities that will add to the prize pool in the form of double rebuys and add ons "WILL NOT get enough players" makes no sense to me. It'll get every single player from the previous tournament and allow them to stick in more buy ins. It all adds up to a larger prize pool.

I'll laugh my ass off when it hits $30-40K and produces the exact same results as Stars.