So, you're focusing on the miniscule number of players who actually take advantage of BSF (10 out of ~3600 two years ago according to Matt), and you're claiming that they will have incentive to chip dump (ie cheat) near the end of their subsequent buy-in IF their stacks are smaller than their original qualifying stack? But you ignore the incentive to chip dump for the MANY MANY more players who have yet to qualify for day two and who are short-stacked near the end of day 1 in a non-BSF format. If you were being even remotely honest in your analysis, you would be filling these threads with posts about how re-entry formats without BSF encourage players to chip dump near the end of their day 1 flights. But you don't do that. Why?

Your argument could not be more far-fetched. Players who build huge stack do not buy-in again. There's no possible sound economic reason to do so. So, your miniscule number of re-buying players becomes even more miniscule if you only care about those whose chips become worthless near the end of their second buy-in. So, this entire discussion is about virtually nothing.

Cheating in poker is a real concern, whether its chip-cheating, or signaling or any one of the other numerous ways players can cheat. But BSF doesn't "corrupt" anything. You continue to make a mountain out of a mole-hill, and what is particularly curious, is you aren't even consistent about which BSF formats you rail against, and which you don't seem to mind.

Matt and wpt featured a story in their updates about a player who reentered wpt 500 last year with a 250k stack already bagged.

Explain why anyone would do this.

Also if only 10/3600 reenter after bagging, why offer an incentive for corruption at all?

getting a story about themselves seems like a good incentive to do it

explain how doing it can result in an increased edge overall

Free will to build up a stack to dump to someone late. Or a way to smuggle more chips.

so there isn't one

buying and selling action is a much bigger problem and will lead to collusion, should be banned probably if you are in the same event as the person you have action in

No other format exists where late in an event most of your chips can suddenly have no value.

satellites

you hate these for some irrational reason, it's ok to admit it

I have no idea. Clearly someone who doesn't care much for $565.

The point is the "threat" of this one person chip dumping is not even remotely comparable to the "threat" of players chip-dumping because failure to do so will cause them to qualify with an unplayable stack in day 2. There are many more of those threats than the ones you talk about.

And your concerns about chip smuggling are also unfounded. Players can pocket chips in any event and bring them to another event. BSF has no bearing on the threat of them doing so.

As for your question about why BSF is offered if so few take advantage, I have no idea. I have stated numerous times that its probably not worth the hassle, even if the hassle is from unfounded attacks like the ones you have propagated. But I don't run a poker room. I'll leave it to them to decide what's in their best financial interest.

But this issue strikes a nerve with me because you are being completely hypocritical about it. Pretty much all the concerns you have raised are inherent in every re-buy format. Even more so in non BSF formats. You don't fill these boards with attacks on re-buy tourneys. And you aren't' even consistent in your attacks on BSF, choosing to go easy on some of the most ridiculous examples of unorthodox structures like the PH Quantum.

When you actually get some consistency in your strongly held opinions, then maybe your viewpoints will merit consideration. Until then, I, and anyone who actually bothers to read what you say, have to assume you have some sort of personal agenda that has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the issues you raise.

Not sure why the thread bump against BSF happened after you admitted that you would support it under the right circumstances on Facebook. To be clear, you can and do endorse BSF. Saying "I talked to someone about it...." is a cop out. Unless they got rid of it after your talking to them about it, you still endorse it. It was quoted as, "chainsaw approved."

To address your other ARIA/LA specific concerns.....to problems that aren't specific to ARIA/LA.......and also exist in "Chainsaw Approved" tournaments, if one person in 3600 has an above average stack, and takes advantage of BSF, they are easier to police. Floor staff and dealers are made aware of the one person out of 3600 that may come to the possibility of having chips that don't have the same value, and are trained in handling it. It doesn't happen, and surely isn't worthy of your selective scrutiny, but if it did, there are security measures in place for it.

Constantly saying, "if it's so rarely used, why have it?" is also a bit ridiculous. Life insurance, fire extinguishers, and air bags are also very seldom used, but they all make people feel better to know that they're there.

I think any reasonable person can figure out exactly why DJ is very selective at which BSF tournaments he chooses to vilify and which BSF tournaments he chooses to endorse. Until there are no BSF tournaments that are "Chainsaw Approved," it seems fair to ignore his opinion on the matter.

Wpt puppet. Fire extinguisher comment priceless.

You never answered why its offered when so few take advantage.

(You admit backhanded that there is an issue in late game play.)

Also never answered why wpt glorified the 250k stack guy reentering last year

I did answer why it's offered. You called my answer priceless. I didn't backhanded admit there was an issue. I openly admit that BSF, like all tournaments, have the potential for cheating. It would be silly of me not to. I can't answer the wpt question because I don't work for them and don't know what you're talking about. Glad you're reading the updates though.

My favorite part is being called a "puppet," when I don't work for ARIA, don't work for the WPT, and out of the two of us, I'm the only one that hasn't changed my stance on the topic based on who is paying me.

To be honest (something I know you insist for yourself), I think the only reason they really need is it makes them a little more money. I doubt that's the only reason, but even if it were, it would probably be enough. Again, none of your objections on this matter are reasonable. And your inconsistent application of those objections is even more dubious.

I feel like BSF is for the guy who gets to day 2 with 2 big blinds, not with 200bb. You could make the player surrender their stack before re-entering, but I think that would deter some fishier players (or perhaps all players) from re-entering because they'd be scared they might end up with nothing.