Can you produce the math for this please?

Curious.

The upcoming Chicago poker classic is an extreme example of best stack forward.

Aria wpt 500 now has succumbed to this format.

They have devised the ultimate rules to give unscrupulous players a huge edge in a $500 buyin $1m guarantee.

Cmon guys the extra added few buyins with this format are far offset by the potential for chip dumping, chip smuggling and related activities.

http://blog.worldpokertour.com/wpt500-new-dates/

Wasn't there an issue at Chicago with a chipleader of some event who after Day1A, was found with extra chips at the start of the Day1B (or plug in whatever letters)? There was a thread here on it, but it devolved into a joke fest and don't recall whether it was true or not. Anyway, agree this is a bad format.

Can someone explain what these concerns have anything to do with the best stack forward format? If a tourney has multiple start days and re-entry but no best stack forward, all of the chip-dumping and chip smuggling concerns remain since short stacks will continue to have reason to do unethical and or illegal things at the end of the day. In fact, they may have even more reason without the best stack forward since they might be eager to avoid going into a day two as a shorts stack at all cost.

Better yet, why not let people buy more starting chips by paying more up front. That's essentially what you're advocating by allowing players to combine their chips from multiple days of play.

Reentry with no best stack forward you have no previous flight chips to fall back on. No way to smuggle chips to that stack. No incentive to dump meaningless chips because u have a stack to fall back to. No incentive to go allin blind since you are playing with a meaningful stack.

If a player plans on re-entering, then they have plenty of incentive to avoid going to day 2 with a short stack. And lots of players would rather miss day 2entirely, than go in short-stacked, since there may be other more attractive options available to them. Therefore players have incentive to dump their chips at the end of the day, or smuggle chips to add to their future re-entry stack, or go all in blind in order to chip up quickly or bust trying. The incentive is there regardless of the chip forward format.

I'm not necessarily advocating for one format over the other. I just think all of these concerns have nothing to do with the best stack forward or alternative format. The issues that arise are due to the re-entry format, not how end of day stacks are handled. Re-entry causes players to be less careful with their chips, play a wilder style of poker, and can incentivize them to cheat by taking chips from less advantageous situations and bring them to more advantageous ones. These are real concerns and many players don't like re-entry events for these and other reasons. However, I would say the prize pool effects of re-entry events more than make up for these concerns. At least they do to me. I think if re-entry events were eliminated, large-field live poker outside the WSOP would likely dwindle and perhaps disappear.

+1

Has anyone bothered to do the math on investing multiple bullets to accumulate chips just so you can have the POSSIBILITY of being moved to the same table as your partner late in the tournament to dump him chips incase he is short stacked?

I would have to argue that it is almost never positive equity to smuggle chips out of play with the risk of jail time. One would have to not only smuggle a large amount of chips to even have a statistical advantage, but he would also have to risk adding them to a short stack on day two without being noticed.....

It's funny how Kessler's relentless complaining has made so many people reflexively reject everything he says. I don't know if he's right this time, but sometimes he is.

The Boy Who Cried Wolf is a cautionary tale, but not against crying wolf. The moral of that story is to learn from the mistake of the villagers. Even if the kid is full of **** most of the time, such a dire warning is still worth investigating. You don't teach him a lesson by letting all your sheep die.

I agree that Kessler picks too many battles in general and because he puts his full enthusiasm behind each one it can get tough to sort out what's super relevant and what's, meh no big deal.

Personally though I think it's great that we have someone with so much passion and is so uncompromised that he's willing to stick it to the man even if it costs himself in the long run.

This specific issue is really bad for a whole host of reasons which Chainsaw pointed out. It's bad for the game and the sole plus for players that there's a big guarantee is not even close to compensation for all the drawbacks.

Thanks for your support. Hopefully someone from aria catches on.

Jimmy, you are on to something here. "Cheating" is something that EVERYONE needs to be vigilant about including dealers, staff, and players and there is no perfect solution as long as multiple reentry and multiple day events exist. I do not want to point out all the ways to attempt to cheat but here is a hypothetical that the unnamed fails to address in his incessant rants.

Let you ask you this hypothetical:

Average chips at the end of the qualifying heats is 300,000

You have 50,000 and are already in the money and you have the bankroll and the desire to reenter if you cannot get to 150,000 (half average).

If you have the option for best stack forward I would NOT dump my chips because i know worst case is I still have a stack to come back to.

If the option is I have to forfeit my chips to reenter what would stop me from dumping my chips to a buddy or even worse pocketing some for the next shot. Let me reiterate that Aria surveillance, dealers, and staff are top notch.

If I have to bust so that I can reenter what would stop me from just shoving in blindly, dumping my remaining chips to a buddy, or even worse pocketing some for the next shot. Let me reiterate that Aria surveillance, dealers, and staff are top notch.

Remember in this tournament at the end of the day you are already "in the money" and if you last until the end of the day you are collecting the next pay jump even if you make it several times which is HIGHLY UNLIKELY.

Having run MANY event like this at the Commerce and Seminole Hard Rock I am happy and lucky to say that there has never been and issue and I have additional procedures in place to safeguard against this type of behavior.

The real issue is multiple same day reentry tournaments IMO which I really oppose.

Not to mention the fact that he has a deal with the WSOP not to badger their every move. He has said he will not be playing at Aria and I am perfectly fine with that.

In Live Poker, has there ever been a recorded instance of players getting punished for chip dumping to a friend/partner ?

Regardless of what matt says theres no way to know if players with a solid advancing stack agree to dump a portion of their chips to a friend late in a given flight.

The fact that he hasn't caught anyone doing this doesn't surprise me. If done properly, its near impossible to be caught.

Its also very easy and nearly impossible to catch someone palming a few hi denom chips from one flight and adding those chips to your advancing stack during a break or table change when day two resumes.

The last wpt in Florida counted every chip on every break but still couldnt explain to me how they could catch someone adding chips once players move tables on day two.

These are just two problems with this format.

Yes, but I've never heard of a player taking chips off his own stack with the intention of adding them to their own stack the next day in the same tournament.

It hasn't been presented in such an easy format to do so until the recent onslaught of best stack forward events.

I was thinking of playing this tournament until I noticed it was a best stack advance. I agree 100% with Allen on this issue.

There are many more like you in this thread as well as on my Facebook.

Theres no reason at all events like this should even exist.

Allen, I agree with some of your concerns, but I disagree that they are limited to best stack forward, and agree with Matt that in some cases they are LESSENED by best stack forward.

You and I just played the WSOPC Main in New Orleans. Day 1A and 1B, no best stack forward. About 20% of each day advanced, with 10% paid, so you aren't in the money by making day 2. Right? OK so I have a 10BB stack with 15 minutes to go in Day 1A. If it is best stack forward, it is in my best interests to spin it up as much as I can, since I can play 1B, and even if I busto 1B, I get a shot at day 2. If it is NOT best stack forward, I can't try 1B unless I get rid of these chips. So now I am MORE incentivized to do the things you don't want me to do like dump chips or shove blind.

I have specifically seen people do this (the reckless spew, no confirmed dumps) in 1A of these main events. Whereas if I could play 1B even if I survived 1A, I have no reason to do so. Thoughts on this specific scenario?

I prefer one entry per player per event. A well run tourney series will have opportunities for those who bust out to play poker if that is what they want. Cash games, single table sitngos, megas, nightly events, etc.

I would preferred to beat players once, not two or three times. I'll take the slightly smaller prize pools, with a better chance to cash/win. I'd probably skip a best stack forward event if held in my area.

offering a guarantee is the main thing that brings in the players. If you need to lower the guarantee to account for only one entry, just do that.

TD's that insure chip counts are accounted for and dealers are trained to spot possible cheaters is the best method. I've never seen any evidence of chips being introduced in tourneys I've played, but I commend the places that have banned cheaters and or put them in jail. No sane person would risk jail time or a ban to cheat in one tourney. There are plenty of crazies that might, but most of those are losing players who will eventually be caught or will just dump anything they win back. Most low life scammers tend to be losers. IMO

Blackaces, Your scenario applies mostly in situations where someone loses a pot late and is crippled down to a small stack.

In that scenario the player would most likely look for a spot where they could get all their chips in and possibly double or triple up.

If that spot didn't arise they could always forfeit the miniscule stack and reenter 1b.

In these 5 or 6 entry flight million dollar guarantees with incentives to cash each flight, and bonuses for most chips carried forward or bagged, there is just too much incentive for someone with a healthy prior advancing stack to dump off most of their chips late in a subsequent flight to a friend who needs them, or to palm a few high denom chips to add to their stack when day two resumes.

If I am going to just forfeit a stack anyway, wouldn't I be better off to palm some chips off it for the next day, or dump it to a friend or someone who kicks me a percentage or some $$?

In your scenario you are forfeiting a miniscule stack. The benefits are not clearly as great as when u have a healthy advancing stack and a decent subsequent stack that's already in the money like this scenario.


Matt savage laims best stack forward is in place to prevent chip dumping.


This may be true if a player hasn't qualified yet, but It actually results in the opposite once a player has advanced in a previous flight with a decent stack.


I hate to give players instructions on how to take advantage of this format, but all players should be aware of what others are capable of doing.


Consider this likely scenario. A player has advanced with an average stack say 350k in flight a and decides to play flight b to try and cash again and maybe better their chip count.

Its near the end of flight b. Players have made the money but player a has only 100k and little hope of surpassing their prior total.

Their chips will soon have no value in this format on day two, and its rather easy to get heads up with a friend who needs chips, and lose most or all of those chips to them in a heads up pot prior to showdown.

Impossible to detect or prove by staff as its unlikely floor people even know player a had an advancing stack or had arranged the chip dump.

Another scenario would be for player a to palm off some large denom chips to add to their advancing stack from the other flight. Again, nearly impossible to detect if added on a break or when moving tables on day two.

I don't reflexively reject Kessler's point of view. In fact, I typically give his opinions far more consideration than he does his own. The problem with Allen is that he invests a tremendous amount of time and energy discussing the general topic of "How poker tournaments should be run" when in reality he knows very little about that. To my knowledge, he has never operated a licensed poker room. He has never run a poker tournament or started up a business which runs poker tournaments.

The topic which Allen knows a great deal about is "How Allen prefers poker tournaments be run". On that topic he is the world's leading expert. Now, I would never debate his expertise in that area, and other people are certainly free to adjust their own poker tournament preferences to be in line with Allen's. But from what I gather reading the majority of his posts, his viewpoint is almost always based on flawed logic, inaccurate information, and wildly over-stated concerns. Unfortunately, this is how most people form their own opinions, so Allen is certainly not alone.

All that being said, I welcome Allen's viewpoints. He should not be summarily ignored just because of his track record and style. However, he should be more open to realizing that others do not necessarily share his point of view, especially when he is confronted by someone who has the audacity to question the logic coming from "The Overflowing Fount of Poker Tournament Knowledge".