A bit of a dispute among us about how to score points for finish in a rebuy tourney for people who rebuy. Person busts out early and then rebuys and finishes first. Do they get first place points or some other point total?

It's a win. If it isn't don't allow rebuys. Does he get first place money?

Whatever the structure, if you won you came in first.

What is the point of rebuying if you can't win if you rebuy?

What's the point of having rebuys if ppl Q.Q when facing rebuys? Idk.

A win is a win is a win.

I had single rebuys for going bust in my league games. A win was worth just as much. If it's not, there goes a huge incentive to rebuy. Discouraging people from spending money is against the very foundation of poker.

BTW, if this isn't for a really significant prize, I discourage keeping long-term score in poker games. I've never not seen it result in chasing away good action.

What can I say but that some people see it differently. I am not one of them. Just asking to see if there is any validity to the different view.

There's no right or wrong way to do this, so there's validity to every view. I used to factor in money spent in points, but I decided that this policy worked contrary to my goals, for the reasons stated.

Running a poker game has some tricky spots. People convince themselves they're better than they are, and that the psychology doesn't affect them. Due to the "leveling" nature of education, it's fairly difficult and counter-productive to try to have a conversation about pretty much anything. A good host gives his players what's good for them, and good for the game, even if the players themselves wouldn't choose it. If it's the right choice, the long-term results will speak for themselves.

In a word, no. It's not even close.

I couldn't agree more with your notion of the duties of a good host, however these comments are either highly political or ... terribly ill-conceived. I guess what you're trying to say is that the people who came up with these ideas are so clueless that the only thing that a good host can do is ignore them completely and avoid debating this issue. Change the topic to something more appropriate <insert conspiracy theory> or <insert favorite polemic>.

Pfap def nailed it. I keep stats, but only for a select few who I know r the cream of the crop. Records chase away the fish.
As far as keeping scores, why can't a player get both scores? Give them a point for their first finish, and then another score for their second finish, and just average it out.
1 point for getting knocked out 1st in a 15 person tourney. Then 14 points for getting knocked out 2nd to last (runner up) after they rebought. So 1+14, or 7.5.

Some leagues take rebuys into account when they calculate points, so if your league does this then the points formula should handle it.

If not, then he's the winner and gets first place points, and I don't see how someone can argue otherwise.

A win is a win, and it doesn't matter unless you have a house/league rule that makes it matter.

If you have enough players in the league that think it should matter, consider factoring rebuys into your point formula.

If you're looking for an awesome formula that takes rebuys into account for points, Dr. Neau's system is very +EV.



Say you have 15 people playing in a $20 buy-in tournament:

1st place (with rebuy): 6.12 points
2nd place (w/o rebuy): 5.77 points

To put it into perspective, if first place had never used a re-buy, they would have been instead awarded 8.66 points.

Once you get the math and order of operations down, it's the best points system to use IMO.

This is the system I've used in the past, and I couldn't agree more.

I do, however, have a few players that believe the nature of a rebuy tournament shouldn't include disincentives toward rebuying...

[derail] Oh, the irony.
[/derail]

I agree. I played in a league that used a Dr. formula (tho' I don't think that one). After a few games, people stopped rebuying. After a few more, people stopped playing.

Touché.

Tho' your repeated one liner digs at me are getting old. I get it. You can stop now, thanks.

Quite simply, choosing to rebuy or not is part of the strategy. I encourage players to throw money at a problem with a mostly static reward (beyond the rebuy money that they add).

Points are the same regardless for us.

[We do a once a quarter (or so) deep stack in my usually two-game-a-night league that allows for a rebuy.]

Nice formula. I'm not sure I'd implement it for reasons already stated, but I do like it and need to back pocket it in case I'm outvoted someday.

The buy-in is the number of buy-ins or the amount of the buy-ins in dollars. And total expense is the amount spent by the player to enter the tourney or the entire prize pool?

Using the 15-person format that I talked about earlier, you'd do the calculations as follows:

15 (<--players) multiplied by $20 squared (<--buy-in) ($400) divided by whatever the person spent in the tournament (expense). It would be $20 if they didn't use a re-buy. $40 if they used a re-buy, etc.

15 multiplied by 400 divided by 20 (no re-buy) equals 300. 15 multiplied by 400 divided by 40 (one re-buy) equals 150.

The square root of 300 is 17.3205. The square root of 150 is 12.2474.

Then you use 17.3205 (no re-buy) or 12.2474 (re-buy) to divide by wherever that player finished +1.

Say you have a player that finished in first without using a re-buy:
17.3205 divided 2 (finish [1st] +1) equals 8.66 points

Now say that same player that finished in first used a re-buy:
12.2474 divided by 2 (finish [1st] +1) equals 6.12 points

Say you have a player that finished in 2nd without using a re-buy:
17.3205 divided 3 (finish [2nd] +1) equals 5.77 points

Now say that same player that finished in 2nd used a re-buy:
12.2474 divided by 3 (finish [2nd] +1) equals 4.08 points

To be fair, in my league, points are merely there to score how well a person is playing... unless you finish the year in the top 5. If you finish in the top 5, you are awarded free entry into our year end tourney (the 'main event'). If you didn't finish in the top five, you can still play in the main event, albeit you will need to buy your way in. It gives our best players throughout the year a bonus to playing in the big tournament for free. (gotta award good players for something, right?)

We have a fair share of people who are quite serious when it comes to our tournaments and then we have the fish who will re-buy 4 or 5 times in a matter of an hour when they are a bit tipsy. Just because it's poker and there is something called variance, we decided that it would be best to use a points system where a fish is unable to re-buy several times and win the tournament and get lucky and beat someone who grinded their way to a second place finish without re-buying. Yes, the fish who won the biggest payout has bragging rights, but the guy who didn't re-buy actually scored almost as many (or in the case of a multiple re-buyer... more) points. Keeps it fun no matter which side you're on.

This is why I saved the formula.

I think, if my environment were different, I'd test this out -- see how it did.

Also, I like the win-freeroll-or-pay finals you have, by the way. Another system I'd consider if I were starting from scratch.

i dont think you should discourage rebuys by penalizing people who rebuy..