pretty much this.

Lol at thinking recs won't play because "pros can buy in 5x". Recreational players who want to play will play regardless. It's just that simple. I've travelled around plenty enough to know this.

The only people who this affects are mediocre regs. I get that poker is already tough enough, live poker especially due to variance. N I get it sucks if 3 WizoWizo's buy into day 2 and all land on your table, but this is part of poker. It's not like after they bust on day 2 they can somehow rebuy again n again until the tournament is over.

Hopefully this just causes Allen to stop travelling to stops I go to and complaining about every place that doesn't cater to him in their MTTc-Live threads.

It's 60 BBs.

(I won't be there, but for other reasons.)

that's because 98% of regs don't follow you and are over your bull****.

Question, were you okay that they let players buy directly into day 2 last year for $3500, for 30k starting stack at 600/1200/200 bb?

Lol I knew youd come here and bash me but this time you're in the 1 percentile.

This is so blatantly bad for poker.

I have no issue with one shot super late reg with starting stack.

Waiting for mukul to come on here now and say what a great format this is.....

Chainsaw, I don't have a dog in this fight since I don't play in these tournaments, but have you actually sent this letter to Adam?

Oh, and...

This statement seems quite fair to me.

but you're not ok with people paying 10k for an amount of chips in which they are paying a premium on? (Mo discussed this earlier in the thread, those paying 10k are paying 1200 more for those chips than others, bad for poker?)

Honestly, letting a bunch of regs in for 3500 on day 2 with 25 bb starting stack is a lot more harmful for the field than day 2 buyins of people spending 10k. I don't think its going to be nearly as many as you'd make it out to be.

I should have been more specific. I meant wild success for the WPT and the casino, not the mid level, recreational players that this affects.

I guess my use of "overwhelming" would be in comparison to the number of players playing the tournament. If 100% of your followers agree with you, but it in no way effects the success of the tournament, I would find that opposition underwhelming. I would guess that many of your followers who agree with you are either going to play anyway, or were never going to play in the first place.

I think that what a large number of players are interested in, is a relatively low buy in with a large payout. I think they're willing to pay the premium of letting the deep pockets have multiple shots in order to do so.

You think they're far more concerned with having to knock out Brian Rast twice. I guess we'll find out.

Plenty of high profile names have indicated they have cancelled their plans to attend.

It will probably be a huge success regardless, however that doesn't mean this format has any benefit whatsoever to the overall poker economy.

I agree with OP - I hate these formats, and I am worried that variations on this are becoming more common.

I am a recreational player, and I get a huge buzz out of occasionally getting into a big live event, through satellites, syndicates etc. It is chance to have a rattle at top players on equal terms.

This clearly favours deep pockets - not just pros but wealthy fish as well. Even the terrible players would often sit down on day 2 with a huge stack.

To realise how unfair and unsporting it is, just imagine if a similar system was used in Wimbledon, or the US Open (golf). If one of these big events allowed deep pockets to gain an advantage, it would clearly be tarnished.

I am in some syndicates which play a league to target big games. We will always target freezeouts.

There is a place for these type of novelty events, just as there is for rebuys, bounty events etc, but organisers should recognise that many people will regard them as just that - novelty events with reduced prestige.

This is why, if there is a very wide choice of possible tournaments to enter in your community/poker site, in general it doesn't make financial EV to play in satellites to larger tournaments. You pay e.g. a 100 dollars to do your first table/day, against other 100 dollar players. When you get through, you are playing for big money but not only against the winning/lucky 100 dollar players from before, but against stronger 1000 dollar players who skipped the satellite stage as their time is worth more. If you play in a mass-entry 100 dollar tournament you get a chance to play for the big money but against other players at your own level.

Of course if the satellite is to a "name" tournament like a WSOP main event then you might perceive other types of non-financial EV in "having played it" even if you don't cash so these satellites can make sense.

Because the first day of the tournament under discussion is a "satellite day", then the players knocked out on that day haven't played a WPT, they have played a WPT satellite.

I'm with Chainsaw here. Single reentry, unlimited reentry for the first few levels, repechage events etc are fine. Rebuys are fine. Buying directly in to day 2 (for more than the day 1 starting stack) is not fine.

For those like me who are finding Quantum Reload as confusing as Quantum Physics, here is a link where Mo Fathipour explains that it "gives rise to several major benefits to the modern Casino." Just like the terrible re-entry format where players keep repaying the full rake to the casino, this is at the expense of most casino players like me.
Do you have a link for the Cardplayer article (Google was NOT my friend)?

Was this terrible Quantum Reload format brought up in the interview with doublejoker yesterday? If not, please discuss in a future PokerCast, and make sure this Bicycle virus doesn't spread to WPT events outside the US!

I have posted on FB, but think I should post here as well. Although I own a business, I try and play WPT and other tournaments, flying out and usually directly buying in as I can't spare the time to sat. Last year I came in 42nd at the Legends and was anxiously looking to go back and already had my plane ticket from ORD-LAS. About a month ago Allen Kessler and I chatted via text and he told me the Legends was "ruined". I investigated and learned about the "Quantum Reload". This was very hard to find at all and you really had to look at the structure sheet to see and understand this.

At the time I looked at this the structure sheet was touting 3 day 1s, instead of 2, and for $10,000 you could buy into day 2 and get $100,000 in chips. This was later changed to 60 BB with the initial BB for day 2 being stated as $1200 (therefore the stack would be $72,000). Now I hear the day 2 average stack will be the amount given to players who buy into day 2. If it's not broke you don't fix something. This has been fixed 3 times and is still broke and will be unless they cancel the QR.

I think many people are missing the dynamics of this. A well funded player can buy into up to 3 day 1s and play hyper-aggressive in an attempt to build a big stack, knowing if they fail they still can make day 2. In fact, I predict that even though there were only 2-4 players last year who finished day 1 with a stack over $250,000 at the Legends and the Borgota combined, and no one who had a stack over $300,000 at either of these tournaments, that there will be several players over $300,000 at the end of day 1 and perhaps someone with over $500,000 in chips, if not someone with the largest end of day 1 stack in the history of the WPT.

Well funded players will be playing the flying trapeze game of poker with a safety net, where as recreational players and semi-pros who won't be able to buy into day 2 for $10K will have to play even more cautiously due to the wild swinging that will be occurring and the fact that they don't have this safety net.

I experienced a similar situation at the Doyle Brunson a couple of years ago when I had JJ on the button in the first hand and Sean Buchanan 3-bet me from the BB. He then fired on the flop, fired on the turn and went all in on the river. I folded my hand which had remained an overpair to the board. Sean then revealed 83 off (he didn't hit either) and stated "gotta love these unlimited rebuy tournaments". This got a great chuckle from the table including Gavin Smith and Will Failla, but I was pissed. Sean went on to take 2nd in the tournament.

Matt Salsberg, who I admire and who coincidently came in the same 42nd place that I did the following year at the Legends, stated on FB that it's bad value for a player to fire $20K into a $3500 tournament. I replied that I witnessed players at the Doyle Brunson fire 3,4,5 and even 6 times. Money means nothing to some of these players who are going for the gold. Look at the number players that buy in and rebuy in for $100K into the Alpha 8.

I am no longer coming to the tournament. I have seen dozens of other players also state they are not playing in it, including pros, semi-pros and amateurs. The pros who like this structure aren't considering the implication of playing in tournaments with much fewer amateurs.

I assume Adam Pliska isn't going to respond positively to this letter:

http://quantumtournaments.com/about/

- but at least due to the fact that they have applied for a patent and are going to charge casinos for using this structure (although they get a free day if they miss their guarantee), and presumably initiate legal action against anyone who tries to use their patented quantum reload(TM) structure or something along the same lines without giving them a cut, I imagine you don't need to worry about it spreading - in fact the possibility of facing legal action from this organization may well serve to block the idea spreading much further.

Can you name a couple high profile/big name/elite players skipping SPECIFICALLY because of this?! (NOT because of Barca/FL/Winstar/resting/other obligations?

If this format is catering to the high profile players, yet plenty of them have cancelled, then how on earth is this tournament going to be a huge success?

Also, wouldn't poker tournaments being a huge success by definition be beneficial to the poker economy?

The bike continues to try to increase the amount of rake and revenue they can take out of the prize pools this is just another was they do this. Over the last years they have taken away most tournament food comps, increased entry fees, added bonus chips add ons were the house keeps the money, keeps an additional 3% of prizepool, use contracted dealers instead of hiring them. People keep coming and their revenues seem to keep going up and up. The bike doesnt care much about the game of poker, they care about maximizing the revenue of poker. If they implement an idea and revenue goes up they keep it. I imagine they will get a decent amount of people to pay the 10k and revenue goes up, and I repeat they do not care what it does to the game of poker.

Imagine if the WSOP Main Event allowed players to buy into Day 5 for $27,000.......or better yet, imagine if you could just buy into the final 10 players, wait for one knock out, and become a member of The November 9 !!!

Yea Poker !!!

The Problem with Poker is it's run by Casinos.

Probably because LA is biggest poker market on the planet and regardless of what you do you will have huge turnouts u twit. Since you know this you take advantage by squeezing every last bit of rake u can without regard to the long term interest of the game.

What an ABSOLUTE MONEY GRAB this "Quantoum Tournaments Concept" is for the Casino. After they grab the early entry fees, then the escalated late entree fees, they suddenly change the Blind formats to a TURBO format !

While they are collecting fees, addons, reentry, and 2nd session BI's.....the blind levels are 55 minutes. Once completed......the levels suddenly shift to 20 minute turbo level !! lol

What a F'ing joke that people fall for this crap. Such poor value for the Poker Player.

http://quantumtournaments.com/

Chip Structure
The players receive 5000 chips to start in session one with an add-on of another 5000 chips. During the second 2 hours players, spend more and get 7000 for the buy-in and 7000 for the add-on. The remainder of the tournament is played in turbo mode with 20 minute rounds.

http://quantumtournaments.com/wp-con...13/02/QR4.jpeg

Caveat Emptor

So far, I have yet to see one single logically coherent argument for why this is "bad for poker"

It's bad for Poker because it's turning Poker into Black Jack.

The Casino's would clearly prefer all tournaments involve high Buy Ins, with starting stacks of 50BB's or less (they would love a 10BB starting stack if they could get away with it)......and the shortest possible levels, with blind levels that at least double every 15 minutes. (10 minutes if they could get away with it).

They don't want Poker to be a skill game, they want it to be a game of chance like every other game in the casino......They want to collect your money as fast as possible, then get you out of the Poker Room and onto the Slot Machines as quickly as they can.

They would prefer you were doing something else in the Casino aside from Poker.

Gimmicks like this is how they are moving in that direction.