blonde poker forum

Rob Yong

" Re-Entry was invented by accident when Simon Trumper played a comp in Vegas, cracked a player who had AA in Level 1, the player received a free-entry into tomorrows tournament as a card room promotion BUT was allowed to enter back into the same tournament by accident......

Late Reg was invented when me and Nick Whiten were 1 minute late for a local tourney in Nottingham and we all know the rest.....

Don't you think its all gone to far now? I am all for travelling to the Isle of Man, busting out Day 1a and having nothing to do all week - so please let me play Day 1B, and I am all for getting stuck in traffic and arriving an hour or so late - so please don't turn me away.....THESE are the reasons we introduced Re-Entry and Late Reg - for the benefit of the travelling players who had booked hotels for a few days or got stuck on the motorway.

Re-Entry and Late Reg now seem to be a way of hitting GTEs and generating extra Reg Fees rather that what DTD invented them for. Players late register and re-enter when 50% of the field is already knocked out, what happened to the good old fashioned feeling of being busting out - and actually being out? Does the guy with 1 bullet have a chance with "highest stack" as opposed to "forfeit stack" - when players who can afford to re-enter can call him on any draw and if they don't hit, just go back down to the cash desk and buy-back in. Do the start of tournaments matter - where is the atmosphere with 20% of the runners there from the start, meeting beforehand to share a drink when we all arrive together? Who cares about the structure of tournaments - players re-entering and registering with 25- 50 BB's brings the average stack right down. Does a satellite player just win a "bullet now" instead of a "seat" in the tournament? Are new players going to think this is how tournament poker has always been? Where is the prestige?

4 years ago I tried to get rid of "Same Day Re-Entry" from DTD tournaments (meaning the last Day 1 was always an old fashioned freeze out), and I lost, players gave me the finger. I tried to reduce late reg - players gave me the finger. It cost me hundreds of thousands, 4 years later, do players still want all this same day re-entry and late reg till next week?

Am I just old fashioned? To be clear, I don't have huge issues with re-entry the next day, that doesn't really effect play + Day 1b then is a freezeout which gives sat qualifiers a better experience - and I would be more inclined to travel to tournaments that allow re-entry next day, I also don't have an issue with a couple of hours late reg for players who are late or don't like to play the early few levels...............BUT that is way different to what is "the norm" now.

I was just sitting here looking as some proposed event schedules and thinking WTF so I thought I would see whether anyone else cared.

Keep The Faith, Rob"

I can live with next day re entry and I have nothing against late reg, but I don't like same day re entry, re buys or add ons.

You can't put someone to a tough decision for his tournament life when he can just walk to the cash desk and buy straight back in.

Smaller guarantees and proper freeze outs for me please.

I am not likely to ever travel to a multi re entry event just like I was never likely to travel to a rebuy next day re entry seems fine

1-2 hour late reg seems fair enough

If the buy ins more than £50 I'm never re r entering

I don't play poker any more but silly late reg for things was one of the things that put me off.

When it got to the stage of six hours of late reg for a comp it was a joke - that's all about using late reg to compensate for poorly set guarantees. An hour is fine.

Re-entry for a different day feels fine, same day doesn't, even though conceptually there isn't much difference. I suppose it's because different days are satellites to the Day 2 (and there's nothing wrong with playing multiple satellites to things), whereas re-entering on the same day kinda goes against the whole point of a freezeout.

I absolutely hate it and it's pretty much ruined tournament poker for me to the point I just don't play any more.

I was a regular at DTD when it was freezeouts but I doubt I'll ever get the buzz back whilst the format stays as it is.

Even throwing in a few freezeouts won't help now as I don't bother looking at the schedules due to assuming that everything's going to be multi entry, re-entry blah blah blah........

I was happy flicking in £300 every month for a chance at £25k but now I feel that I'm at a huge disadvantage unless I've got at least 3 bullets to fire and that's just too much money.

I'm with the moany old buggers above - quite happy to see lower Guarantees & Prize pools, in exchange for more clarity as to late reg & re-entry. 2 or 3 levels of Late Reg is plenty.

Re-entry is a double edged sword, of course, it does add value for all of us. It's not awfully nice though to be sat next to a guy who has the cash for 5 or 6 re-entries sat on the table behind his chips so he can nonchalantly call off light, even though he reps great value. That's not much of a level playing field in my book.

KtF (patent pending)

It would be horrendously expensive for any stakers you may have, too.


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Mirny_in_Yakutia.jpg/1200px-Mirny_in_Yakutia.jpg)

This pretty much sums up my views as well although i don't see the problem with late reg for your first bullet as it only hinders yourself turning up late.  

In addition the major factor which stops me playing now is 20% of the prize pool being converted into seats for much bigger buy in future events which I don't really wish to play for several reasons.  They are outside of my bankroll and i can't afford the ability to re enter like numerous other players can so i am disadvantaged and, secondly, i don't even know when the dates of these future events are and whether i will be able to play them even if i wanted to.  So now when you casually think at 2pm on a Saturday 'let's go and play the £300 deepstack' and jump straight in the car, which i used to do virtually every month for 4 years in the early days, even though i live an hour away, i now have to think 'On the off chance i do cash do i really want to (or date wise can I) play the event cashing in this ties me to in the future/go to the website and see when the event is etc etc?  

Now most months i just choose not to play as I just want to turn up and play poker/gamble and take any winnings home in cash (the same way as i bought into the event).  There is zero flexibility when you 'win' your first seat for future events (even though u have effectively bought  your seat into the future event with your own cash you have won via the prize pool).  I appreciate this helps create bigger prizepools/gtd's etc but, for me, it isn't the product i want so most of the time i choose not to play.

The other really annoying thing is the biggest bubble in the event by far now is the seat bubble on 25 or 50 left and not the actual bubble.  It makes you have to play the event differently once you have reached the cash and turns it much more into survival mode when you are short or semi short even though you have already made the money as the seat bubble £ wise is so big.  Most of the time it feels like you are playing a giant double or nothing on final day before the seat bubble busts due to the value of the seat.

I should add that I'm not against late reg at all it's the re-entry during the late reg period that I don't like. Late reg for any more than 1 hour is pushing it as well.

Next day re-entry doesn't bother me too much although when there's about 12 day 1s it becomes ridiculous again.

agree with most of the above...re entry on another day is ok but not a fan of same day re entry.
only ever played a live rebuy and add on tournament once and hated the idea so haven't played one since.

I know the 'seats included' is a road DTD have gone down and fully understand the reasoning but really dislike this aswell and would much prefer the prize pool just be prize winnings.

Andrew nails it for me, everything he said.

Agreed

Let me throw another spanner into the works:

 If you hate same day re-entry then you will hate the deal with Bank Roll Supply, effectively giving many players on their books free unlimited re-entry tickets, so that they call you for fun with bottom pair or air and try to bad beat you on every hand. The game has no value to the player who has unlimited re-entries and is effectively free rolling the torney!  So Im not exactly sure why rob has created this discussion thread as he is instrumental in this happening in most of the deep stack torneys, I fully understand the business sense behind the decision - of trying to fill an overlay gap in the prize pool, but it spoils the game for the many who have to put up with horrendous beats month after month and all the while leaving a sour taste in the mouth on every occasion.

I am sure if your are a BRS player then you certainly wont agree with the above, but when you are playing for free then life really is good I suppose!!

Don't shoot the messenger, as I have heard the above expressed by many regular players but I am the person vocalising this and after careful consideration do agree with them.

Could you get more chips if you're in your seat from the beginning? Or in some other way encourage people to be there from the start, like a reg fee rebate. Pretty sure local comps used to do something like that. That way people feel less like a mug arriving on time and watching half the field waltz in whenever they fancy, cos at least they got a bit of value.

Pretty sure back in the early GUKPT days you'd lose a certain amount off your stack for late entry, although was probably just the equivalent of being blinded out for that period.

Ultimately it is the superior players and the card rooms who benefit most from re-entry, but then most decisions in the industry are made to please those two groups hence the exodus of casual players over the years.

I am all for people calling me off with bottom pair and bad draws.  Wish it still happened on line.  Sad that people want to put a stop to it live too.

With re-entry, as someone who is a bit of a rec and travels to DTD, same day re-entry makes much more sense than next day.  I don't ever want to come back for an unexpected day B, but would like the choice if I go out early on my original choice.

Late entries do seem silly at times, but I don't get why people think the late starters get a massive advantage.   I'd say late entering online is a big leak of mine, and sure it is true of others.  If someone wants to do a day's work and then blind shove 15 big blinds, let them do it.  Likewise if some people want to burn 30k chips and try to spew their way to a bigger stack on a late day 1, I gain two ways, once from 30k of burned EV, and again from someone playing like a loon. 

Think a lot of people just aren't as good as they used to be, but instead of blaming themselves, blame things that have changed.  The game just left us behind.  If I ever start complaining about people endulging in different types of spew on multiple entries then please ban me from poker immediately.   I am already thinking I am gone at the game at times, and that would be all the proof I need to be sure. 

I'd say the things you can change is getting rid of re-entry after the first 2 or 3 levels for all but the biggest tournaments and definitely lose some day 1s.   I really don't think people are that bothered whether it is a 200k or 300k guarantee for their £50 entry fee.   

Oh and ps, tried the software a bit yesterday.  Cards seem very hard to read and I don't think a cheery message telling me I have a pair of sevens is ever going to go down well when I have just exited.  Just seems a massive rub. 

am with everyone else on this....miss the true freezeout and no re-entry, no rebuy or add-on....don't mind late reg as we all need to late reg now and then

I think the far more damaging thing to poker which has contributed to spew is the huge stack sizes that u get in smaller comps these days.

And in general people just love to moan. U can't please all of the people all the time. Switch it back to freeze outs with no late reg and people will still moan when they can't late registration or re enter.

I'm a fan of late reg, but it should only be for the first three levels/first break, no need to have reg until 5.30pm on a 12pm start comp.

Never been a fan of re-entry though and don't understand why poker rooms do it, especially same day. People who re-enter, imo, are more likely to play cash and surely the club wants them to play there? I can understand next day re-entry but these should be capped as well, especially with multiple Day 1's.

Bedi is spot on btw, bring back the 10k or 15k chips, 45 min clock starting at 25/50. Such a better game than having ridiculously large starting stack and increasing blinds to begin. The game does play faster because antes are in play from the start.

I would imagine Rob is thinking about changing it, but would like some player feedback first. Rob often sounds out players views, which I would say is a good thing.  It's a discussion thread. I wish all cardrooms did that sort of thing.

As to BRS players maybe calling off light - the more the merrier please. Why would you not like that?

Rob created a big thread on HUDs etc. i think the aim is there is to go to party with some ammo

now re-entry/late reg....these threads can be good


i agree about big stacks. back when i was playing a lot live i used to think i wanted a big starting stack, but in practice these did as much to create a "false" game as re-entry etc

players still don't understand the stack/clock dynamics though and the big starting stack good, small starting stack bad mantra is still all-pervasive

even online on party in the dtd majors the starting stacks are too big, though late entry and clock levels have been shortened which is something for us old farts who want to be in bed at a reasonable hour

I echo the sentiment of posters so far and find a lot of the buzz lacking from tournament poker these days. A tournament should be clock starts and bang we're away, no re-buys, no late comers, no re-entry. When you're out you're out! That's the only way to create the intoxicating atmosphere and knife-edge tension that make tournaments so appealing.

Trying to accommodate regulars who like to travel and stay in hotels is all well and good but really a poker club wants to promote conditions that suit new players so there's a steady supply of fresh customers. The average bod in the street wont travel and stay in hotels, they relate to say FA cup where the little guy can win and when you're out you're out. That's where the buzz comes from. With the re-entry system the little guy feels dis-advantaged and rightly so. Are they the best conditions to sustain long term growth in new players for a poker club??

Prefer no late entry and no re-entry. I can see why people do like these though just not for me. Rarely play tournies now as I don't like this or the guaranteed seats included in may of the games.

If you want to play turn up on time. If you bust early play cash, go to another card room or go home

I am a massive fan of Rob and what he is creating at dtd.  The point I was trying to make is that he is instrumental in using this to the max with some players having unlimited free re-entries,  since he relies on this so heavily especially in the deep stack events, is there really a capacity to change it??

In many peoples opinions this scews the game when you are entering a torney and attempting to play your best poker and navigate through a field, when many others are calling off all their stack with 7 2 and getting there and crucially being told during the break by that player who knocked you out 'that he would never have called his stack off if he didn't have unlimited reloads' that always leave a sour taste!!

Its the same reason why when you have learned the art of poker and consider yourself a decent player and are happy to play at a great venue like DTD, you really go back to playing £1 pots at your mates house or at the local because you know that everyone is calling with anything and the best hand rarely holds up.  I just don't want DTD to have that type of reputation.  
fish food for thought.

mathematically the best hand will hold up to the percentages over the long term yes?

so you want these players in the game, giving you chips?

This is my problem with the seats issue. So many people think the seats are added.  When you play a £300 deep stack you are paying £60 of your entrance fee towards the value of these seats. They are not added.  I think more than half the people think these seats are added to the cash prize pool from the people I have spoken to about it.  Amazing marketing.

I'd go for:

re-entry, but only on future day 1s.

No add ons or reloads

Late reg, but only up until first break

Seats included to be now and again and only for HUGE events, not every tournament like they seem to be nowadays.

 If that all means smaller guarantees, then so be it.

Level (or as close as possible) playing field FTW. Agree with Matt and others that the fact that this is what it used to be like, and it is not the antithesis for the most part, has led to me playing less and less over the past 18 months or so.

Rich that's a very valid point, the answer is an ironic  'definite maybe YES', unless your on the receiving end I suppose!

I am not bashing rob for doing this as it makes financial sense and clearly he is an astute business man and poker fanatic,  I just hope that it does not detract the many loyal supporters of the club in the longer term.

I am a support of the club, but hope that Rob can navigate through to calmer waters!  bring on pokerfest week!!!  good luck to everyone giving it a bash!!!

For all of the above reasons those seats, having been paid for in full, should also be transferable.

On the re-entry issue, speaking as one of the little guys who is only ever going to have one bullet, it just feels like pissing into the wind what with the higher skilled/bankrolled/staked players having their advantage excacerbated by the current parameters.

There's a lot of logical fallacies ITT. Here are some of them:

- People calling off with bottom pair because its re-entry is bad. No. No, no, no. This is good. We want this to happen. Everytime you bust a tournament this way you should be happy that someone put their money in so bad and realise that that is a good thing for you in the long-run. And then re-enter :D It's funny that these are the same people complaining about HUDs making online unbeatable - "everyone's too good"?! Which way do you want it?!

- People will unlimited re-entries have an advantage. They don't at all. If their larger bankrolls mean they make poor decisions on their first or second bullets then great, let them continue to play poorly please.

- People turning up late have an advantage.  They don't at all. How could they? Your stacking stack is worth the most in hand 1, level 1. Then gradually decreases in value as the registration period goes on. There's just no argument here.

- People staked have an advantage Why? Again, if people "playing for free" means they make poor decisions, then great, please continue. Also this whole "playing for free" notion is generally not true - most staking deals have makeup, so a player needs to makeup all the tournaments he's not cashed before he can see $ for himself.

- DTD are losing customers because of these tournaments. Please, tell me more about how DTD is losing customers because of their hugely popular and successful tournaments... ;tk; Yes, it may have lost you specifically, and most of the people in this thread will be posting because they aren't happy with the status quo (selection bias), but just look at the numbers. Rob tried to stop re-entry once and got it in the neck, he tried to limit late reg, and again, got it in the neck. The masses clearly like the huge guarantees and structures the way they are. People will always complain. Poker players especially :)

Now, as for my personal opinions I like the following:

-Long late reg, 8/9 levels, why not? Again there's no logical reason why people shouldn't be allowed to register really late. Can't agree that tournaments these day lack the buzz of days gone by, quite the opposite. Try being at DTD around a Grand Prix or UKPC week and tell me the atmosphere isn't phenomenal. You never get knife edge tension in day 1 anyway - in freeze outs or re-entries - the knife edge tension comes later, and it is a hell of a lot bigger when theres a big juicy first prize up for grabs.

-1 re-entry per flight. If not, then just one entry per flight. You should be able to play at least once on 1a, 1b, 1c. But not more than twice per flight. Bringing freezeouts back would make me so much less likely to travel to play.

-Not fussed at all about add-ons and reloads. For satellites only imo.

What Alex said is pretty much what I would have typed, but shorter.

Would have shorter late reg than 8/9 levels though.

4 would be good.

You would've typed more than that?

 ;boltpp;

Never typed that much in one post, ever. I meant mine would have been shorter.

Lol yes I thought that wasn't your style. But I can't assume the opposite to what you typed  ;nana;

:(

Agree.


Disagree. They don't have an advantage per se, what they are doing though is massively increasing the variance for themselves and the rec punter who wishes to have one bullet. For you, this is good because you are a pro player and can handle the variance. For me as a rec, this is likely to put me off and go back to my mates down the local casino in Liverpool and say "No point travelling to DTD, might as well play bingo because of the variance", and not only is the rec disillusioned from playing again, he's telling all his mates not to bother.


Again, agree.


Don't have a view on this as not a staked player but it would make sense. The BRS info put up earlier was kinda confusing tbh!


There are a lot of former players from DTD ITT and in the Facebook thread asking for freezeouts. I'm under the impression (but I may be wrong) that whilst the number of entries for comps are up, the number of unique entries for comps is down. This is good for you, as a pro, and me, as the rec, because prizepools are better. However, for Rob's business, this is not good. Although people who re-enter pay numerous amounts of rake, half of that goes to the government in tax. He sells less food and beverages because there are less people in the club. There are less people on his slot machines/roulette/blackjack tables.


Because it's not worth it stack size wise. I would be interested to know the numbers of people who late reg before and after the first break.


I think it should be once per flight for the health of the club. At the end of the day, if I am a rec who travels to DTD for a 2pm comp, chances are first thing I do when I sit down is order a beer. Now you've got me in the club and I've had a drink. I'm not really going anywhere. If I want to drink, I can drink at DTD. I can eat at DTD. If I'm not playing tournament poker (which I would imagine brings the least profit per person to the club), then I have a choice of cash poker, sit and go's (where the hell did they disappear to?), slots and casino gaming.

Maybe I'm wrong, who knows. I remember days where I would be up there for the Monthly Deepstack and by 7pm, there were shedloads of cash tables. Now I believe that doesn't happen, because everyone's playing the comp as there are two starting flights on each day etc.

We can ask for loads of re-entries and loads of chips, but the Club needs people to play slots, play casino games, play cash, buy beer and eat food. Or it will die.

Ideally Id like to see Late Reg a bit shorter.  I dont think its that bad mostly but I think its nonsense when people can buy into day 2 of a tournament.

Id also like to see Re-Entry limited to 1 per flight unless theres only 1 day 1 or something like that and allow 1 re-entry during late reg mostly to save people from themselves.  If someone goes for several bullets they might not go to the next tournament incase they end up in for loads again.

The "pro's" having an advantage because they can punt it and just re-enter isnt a legit arguement imo as its not like its only pros that will re-enter and recs will never re-enter.  Its more a case of the pros who can afford it will re-enter if they want to and so will the recs.  There will be pros and recs alike who have 1 bullet to fire at a tourney and cant re-enter if something goes wrong.  I think it also swings both ways on this too, people might punt it and gamble knowing they can re-enter, which causes more variance for recs but on the other side of it,  its now harder to really put pressure on someone early in the tourney.  Putting "recs" to decisions for their tournament life on the early levels is almost redundant now as they can also just call it off and hope theyre right and re-enter if theyre not.

I'm sure that everyone will agree that a "pro" with the ability to have multiple re-entries will have a considerable advantage over a "pro" who only has one bullet.

Ergo a "pro" with the ability to have multiple re-entries will have have an even greater advantage over "recs" with either the ability to have multiple entries or one that is only firing one bullet.

Why?

A pro with one bullet has an advantage over a rec with one bullet.

Let's just ban poker and make it fair on everyone

If you must keep it then limit re entry to first 90 mins or thereabouts, and late reg to the same. Current system allows both options for far too long. If that means that a £150k gtee has to be reduced to £75k then reduce it for a while.
The 25/25 series seems pretty popular without having any headline guarantee, as does the GPS.
I know that ambitious guarantees have become part of the DTD image with overly generous satellite guarantees as well, and I appreciate the desire to keep the money in the Poker Community, but I'm sure I'm not the only one whose DTD visits have been significantly reduced by a sense that multiple day ones, multiple re-entry, best stack through etc favour the time and cash rich over the true recreational player.

I hear all the arguments about how we want the loose calls and the extra money in the prize pool but frankly, if I manage to knock out Alex Goulder, Greek Jack, Rastafish, Wadeyone of the Johnsons  or whoever in level five I don't want to have to knock him out again the same day.

Btw Alex, for a lot of us Rec's there isn't necessarily a 'long run'.

GPS has a substantial late reg and re entry period iirc?

25/25 do 3 levels which does seem to be popular

If multiple entries are not advantageous why are they banned online?

I agree with elements of David and arrboys posts.

With respect, DTD feels like the DFS of the poker world. I remember those ads where they had amazing offers on every single week. It got to a point where u think "well it doesn't matter if I miss this sale there'll be one next week" and I very much think that's what happens at Dtd. That and people obviously have a limited spend on poker which can be reached very quickly with multiple re entries.

I also agree with arrboy with regard to the prize pool being diluted with seats to other comps. I understand why Dtd do it and it is popular but I much prefer the prize pool being just that. What U can win. If I then decide to play other events at Dtd (which is very likely) I can

I do not agree with that! It's one of the logical fallacies I mentioned earlier.

There is no advantage.

If I can play the DTD deepstack with 6 bullets all that does is reduce my variance - I can get in more volume than the pro who can only play it with 1 bullet. Over a year, I will play 72 "tournaments" and he will just play 12.

If you need six bullets at every deepstack you may want to consider a change of career  :)

But, if you and this other guy who only gets one bullet are of equal skill, which of you will have most chance of being profitable over those 12 (72) tournaments?

I don't completely agree as you can alter your style to gain an advantage imo but that's a moot point.

What is indisputable is your advantage being enhanced over recs by your ability to have multiple re-entries, resulting in the recs going busto faster.

Altering your style to gain an advantage? Just makes no sense. Going from winning poker to losing poker? If a fold is correct then it is correct. It doesn't become a call if you can re-enter, or become a raise if you can re-enter.

I feel I've ran out of ways to explain my point, so don't want to keep posting the same thing. I'm out guys :)

How is this even a question. Lets make this a little bit more extreme. If two people have the exact same skill edge in the same tournament, and one plays 12 tournaments and one plays 12k tournaments, of course the person playing 12k is more likely to be a winner. The only problem with reentry is the higher variance (due to the increased blind levels) for the winning players, but this is somewhat mitigated by a) the lack of better games/hourly elsewhere b) lowering the fixed costs (hotel/petrol etc.) If the question was about rolling a 1000 sided die and landing at least one 1000, you would obviously pick 12k over 12.

Alex's post was excellent and I agree with it all. I do feel some sympathy for Sharpleas argument about the reentry/bingo stuff but I don't really agree with it. Its not just professional players doing a reentry after all. I also have some sympathy for someone who knocks out Alex and then gets him seated on his left shortly afterwards. I think it kinda sucks too, but I don't think stopping reentry is a great solution either. I don't think this means you can complain about bingo players knocking you out though. Generally after I bust a live comp I'll be heading towards the bar fairly quickly, reentry or not! What I will add is the "advantage" Alex gains by reentering is largely moot due to the fact he has already lost his initial buyin! Just like he can rebuy in a cash game, it isn't an advantage if he has already lost. I know what you mean, he gets to reenter and make £1500 on his £1k buyin but he is still entering the tournament again, and paying the privilege to do so. If you said to me, only professionals reenter, I would say its a bad thing, but I don't think that is the case.


Btw, I'm not 100% on this and I was talking about it with a few friends recently and no one really convinced me either way, but I think if you play a 1k runner field for a 100$ buyin and everyone has the same skill level, your chance is winning is 1/1000. However, if you have starting stack with 500 people left, you chance of winning is probably 1/700? I guess your chance of mincashing has diminished and this might make up for it, but I feel like lateregging is good for the player due to the ICM factor of having dead money in the prizepool. After all, if you doubled up first hand, your chance of winning isn't 1/499.5, its like 1/750.

I guess this isn't too much of a factor, as literally every site offers latereg, so maybe the effect isn't really there.

As my own personal view, I do like reentry and I don't really have a problem with latereg. I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the day 2 latereg, but I guess its ok. I did feel a bit ridiculous firing 5 bullets at the Sky UKPC thing. I think a balance has to be struck and at least some major festivals should be freezeouts or perhaps 1 reentry.

You ignored the second part of my post so I assume you agree with that.

If only alex re-entered then a Rec in the same comp would get slightly less EV.  If only a rich idiot re-entered a rec in the same comp would have slightly more EV.  Without knowing the ratio of pros to idiots in the rebuy stats it is impossible to say if your Rec wins or loses.

If we assume pros are making bad calls because they have loadsamoney, then the Rec gains EV, but that seems far fetched to me.

Re-entries- As much as I hate them personally the genie can't be put back in the bottle. They've been adopted world wide and universally accepted even if disliked. There are just too many reasons for them from both sides of the fence and I won't bore everyone with the arguments that have mostly appeared here already. HOWEVER- the ease of re-entry can lead to some very marginal poker decisions and the consequent cascade of bad feelings and opinions. One thing that I've tried, on a small scale, is a delayed re-entry. They can have one re-entry but have to miss a level/ set period of time before taking their seat. This doesn't completely eliminate the bad decisions but as most of the re-entries tend to come from the same crowd (gamblers to a man) the threat of delayed gratification can make them re-think that bottom pair call.   Depending on the tournament software used it's not too difficult to manage. It has the added benefit to the venue of having those with a gambling bent and time to kill hanging around.......

Late Reg- A difficult one to get right. There is undoubtedly a need for it as not everyone can get to a tournament for the start. However there's a tendency of poker players to seek out the 'angle' in anything so if the stack at last entry is a decent multiple of the blinds or proportion of expected average stack they'll let the 'mugs' rebuy/ re-enter and build the prize pool. Early bird chips can help but again need to be balanced so as not to totally dissuade late entrants. I do think that late entry periods need to be shortened as it makes it virtually impossible to plan dealers/ tables when more than two thirds of the field turn up after the start! Shortening the late reg period will doubtless generate the normal plethora of moans but it's an issue that needs to work for the benefit of the majority, venue included. Less money wasted means more in the prize pools in the long run.

Just for some balance what was the format of the first ever monthly deepstack at dtd back in the day?  £300 2 days 10k chips, starting blinds 25/50, 40 min clock, proper freezeout/no late entry at all and only 1 day 1?

Surely freezeouts are great for introducing new players to the game? I had some friends who wanted to play for the first time so took them to the local genting for a £20 unlimited re entry comp. They loved the game but hated the fact that when a player got knocked out he could simply dive into his wallet and be back in the game a hand later.

I could be incorrect completely and maybe novices generally prefer rebuys, but this is always how I've perceived it. If freezeouts are preferred, surely they should be there to bring fresh blood into the game, a game which is in decline.

Stop obfuscating.

Only an obstinate fool would dispute that re-entry tournies favour pros.

If Alex re-enters a tournament just think of it as two different players both called Alex Goulder entering the same tournament, with one of them late regging or choosing to play a different day. The fact that it is actually the same person makes no mathematical difference at all, at least not in terms of 'edge'. Those who are saying stuff like "re-entry give bigger edges to the pros" are not understanding things correctly.

However, they are not totally wrong... and there are a few ways in which a re-entry option could lead to some sort of edge for Alex. It may make Alex play with more confidence in certain spots, and thus play better poker. For example, he is in a very close spot that if he gets right he will gain a big stack but if he gets wrong he will be busted. Maybe from an EV perspective this spot calls for him to make a big hero call. But Alex is not a perfect playing poker machine, he is a human being with emotions, feelings etc. One of these emotions could be that he does not really want to bust the tournament early, especially if he has travelled to get there etc. So he might be tempted to make a cautious fold in a spot where a hero call is the correct play. To preserve his tournament life, wait for a better spot etc. This would be him playing worse poker than his absolute A-game. If he knows he is able to re-enter the tournament if he busts then he will be more likely to make the correct but high variance play. In other words, re-entry allows those with the ability to re-enter to have an advantage over those without this ability since they are able to be a bit more cold-blooded in their decision making and do not feel as many outward pressures on them.

I do think the above is a legitimate argument that re-entry ability can give a very small additional advantage to a skilled player. He will be able to make optimal decisions a little more easily in certain high variance spots. However, IMO the effect of this is going to be pretty damn small in the great scheme of things.

That said, there are other arguments against multiple re-entries that IMO are much more important than the 'it gives the pro players a bigger edge' line. The biggest one is simply that it makes the tournaments much tougher (for everyone!) because it upsets the rec/pro balance. Pros (or non-pro good players) are presumably more likely to re-enter a tournament than recs or weak players. If we have a 50:50 rec/pro balance in a pure freezeout then half the entries will be from pros and the other half from recs ldo. If this tournament becomes a muliple re-entry then you might end up with something like 65 rec entries and 100 pro entries. i.e. the % of pros in the field has increased. This does NOT mean that the "pros have an edge" btw. But what it does mean is that everyone's expectation in the tournament is reduced, since the field has become tougher. So EVERYONE loses out in terms of overall EV through a tournament being a re-entry instead of a pure freezeout.

As regards more practical considerations, well I suppose it can work both ways. Of course there will be some guys who travel a long way with only one bullet and get upset when they get busted first level to a guy who is punting his stack since he can re-enter. On the other hand, there will also be players who are very relieved that they can re-enter after losing a massive race, since they have travelled a long way to play and would hate to be out of action after one hour given that they have planned their whole day/weekend around playing the tournament.

BTW, anyone who is complaining that "re-entries are a bad thing because they allow people to punt/play badly and they might outdraw you with their bad play" needs to stop right there and think a bit harder about what they are saying. This is a huge argument in FAVOUR of re-entry!

In the end it comes down to balance. Multiple re-entry allows huge prize pools to be generated which creates an excitement and buzz around DTD. But on the other hand, it makes the tournaments tougher with a worse rec/pro balance. My personal opinion is that the long-term health of the games would be best served by reducing re-entries as much as possible. But that is only my own opinion.

 If only this was the 2nd paragraph you wrote and not the one you wrote about recs going busto quicker. 

Recs are going busto quicker these days simply because there are a lot more competent players than there once was.  The effect of re-entries and late registration is going to be pretty marginal.  Most of the tournaments on stars are not re-entry, but I am still doing far worse than I once did. 

Of course those recs that choose to do lots of re-entries will go busto quicker than those that don't. 

The flip side of that is it becomes impossible to put pressure on players early doors. It used to be a workable strategy to put extreme pressure on knowing that you were never getting played back at with less than the nuts. Correct me if I'm wrong but I always understood part of poker was to try and force your opponents to make -EV decisions and the re-entry option makes that FAR more difficult. Alex is a good player so if I can put him off making the risky (but correct) hero call I want that edge!

Isn't that sort of the point I was making in the part you quoted?

there was late entries but only an hour or 2 10k chips sounds right not sure on the clock yes there was only 1 day 1

Only time I've been to DTD for a 300 was in early 2009, which was 10k starting stack, and I think it was a 40min clock.

Turned out to be the worst table draw of my life, because it meant meeting Cute, and I've been listening to him moan it in ever since :D

Who is "Cute"?

If I move all in v Mr multiple bullets, I can't rep it, I have to have it. The flip side is, he can rep it and I can't call.

Honrybadger's point about looking at it as several players all called Alex Goulder doesn't work. We have to look a it as several players all called Alex Goulder that we can't rep a hand against.

Btw- I saw the typo, but it was too good to correct.

The argument as to whether re-entry or multi entry gives an advantage to any particular group of players is pointless to be honest.

Rob is seeking opinions and nobody's opinion can possibly be wrong, it may be flawed but if their flawed thinking is what's stopping them from turning up at DTD to play these comps then that's what Rob needs to know.

Fwiw (not a lot) I personally think that multi entry gives a huge advantage when it comes to marginal decisions in early levels of tournaments. For example in a 3 day comp, level one with no information on any players whatsoever. A pro who has experience of going deep in to long tournaments may find the fold button with the second nuts as he knows he's got 3 whole days to utilise his edge over the field. Knowing that he has the option to re-enter with an average stack again makes his decision much easier.

His decision has to be affected by the knowledge that he can re-enter and if he claims otherwise he's lying. You can argue all day about if it's right it's right but there's no way that having the re-enter option doesn't help. There's also the point that his decision is affected by whether the other guy has the ability to re-enter. The whole dynamic changes when either or both players can or will re-enter.

Maybe if people are planning on re-entering they should have to purchase their (refundable) re-entry ticket at the time they initially enter and have some kind of token on display? At least if other players know everyone else's situation they can make the necessary adjustments to their calling/folding/bluffing ranges.

That's a great Post Mr R.

There does appear to be a consensus on here that late registration is good for the game (especially for those stuck in traffic, cant get out of bed, plan to avoid early action on the felt,  or people who love being fashionably late or lazy).  but how many levels of late registration should be allowed??  if the day 1's are 12 levels long is 3, 6, 9 or 11 levels of late registration acceptable??  

Consistency in the late registration must be adhered to! if day 1A has late reg until the end of level 3, the final flight of the week should not have late reg until 9/11. as has been seen on several occasions.

There are pros and cons to a re-entry and like most things in life it just depends on what side of the fence you sit on!!   RED-DOG makes a very clear, simple and effective argument against  Mr Multi bullets which most people would agree with.

If I move allin vs Mr 1 bullet, he's never going to pay me off. The flip side is, when they move in against me, I will pay them off everytime.

So you say the argument is pointless, and then you make your argument?

But I have to have it, and most of the time, I don't got it.

So what?

What?

You crazy you!

(https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=https%3A%2F%2F38.media.tumblr.com%2F447f2a4d426f5bb2949ba88a27908c1c%2Ftumblr_mokl3b4lI71qglkrwo2_500.gif&key=mVg_9PdS1MvAEsl3O5aOWg)

Lol, have You ever moved all in and not had it?

One could argue that there is No need for re-entries at all as there is an ever increasing amount of day 1 flights to chose from, often two or even three the same day!!

The rare few that can afford multiple bullets will soon go skint / get fed up never cashing surely ?
Personally I've never figured where lol recs get all these multiple re entries from
I consider my self a lol rec and I won't spend over £100 on a buy in unless I've satellited in ,I've tried bigger buy ins with obv no success and realised my ability level
Maybe there's a lot who havnt / won't do that and keep trying for a big score ??
At what point do they stop ?
Isn't the market saturated with constant £200/500£ "deep stacks " there's something on every weekend somewhere
I understand some win money on other forms of gambling but once again not all of them ??

He moved in v me with A-9. A-bloody NINE.

Walsall Super Sat, 2004. Ridiculously optimistic.

I personally feel same day re-entries do kinda spoil things a little and do favour the people with the cash. Yes, the times when some does say "fuck it, lets go, I can just re-enter if I lose" and gets loads of bigs in with a bad hand then we're going to be doing well in EV. I would have supported this whole heartedly back when I had money, but now I can kinda understand the frustration of travelling to a big comp like that, only being able to afford one bullet and being knocked out in this fashion. From a professional standpoint, I guess you'd say if you want to play a tournament that you aren't rolled for then don't play it, but this isn't the view of recreational players (and I would consider myself now to be a recreational tournament player). Next day re-entry I'm completely fine with, but being able to flick it in because you've got cash to reload and can do so immediately is a little unfair on the people without that money and makes the experience less enjoyable imo.

As for late reg, definitely all for this, but it's starting to get a little silly. I played the 6-max yesterday, a £70 £5k gtd side event, which had NINE LEVELS of late reg. That's over 5 hours of grace for what I thought was originally put in place to allow for people getting stuck in traffic or at work. On a bank holiday Monday. To my mind there is absolutely no reason for this, and it's a little annoying to not see the field size shrink at all for nearly half the length of the tournament. Couple of hours late reg max would be much better imo.

Id say 25/25s are the most reasonable when it comes to their late reg and re entry policy.

The last 2 sky poker events at DTD and the last UKIPT there just seemed like they were set up for people to re-enter as many times as possible.

GPS have probably done the most to their re-entry and late reg structure to have players fire as often as possible

As a rec player (who does not get to casino's all that often), late reg upto first break makes perfect sense, as it is generally an hour or so trip to casino and with kids etc can often be late.

Don't really like re-entry as does encourage some people to call light etc. Having said that any Rec player is always going to be at a disadvantage anyway as the regulars know they can enter the next comp, or the one after if they get knocked out. Whereas the rec may not get back for a month and therefore this is their one big game so can you really make that hero call for all your chips!.

However, at the end of the day we need the casino's to continue to put the games on and therefore we have to accept the conditions, most players would have a choice of a few casino's at the moment and therefore you pick the game that you prefer.

Agreed. It's that never ending battle between re-entries & Guarantee sizes. We get complaints if we reduce the Guarantee, but I'm not convinced it makes much practical difference. We are generally guided by Rob in these matters, & we very much respect his opinion. He's not always right, of course, but I believe he wants to do what is best for everyone. An impossible dream.

I really appreciated it when late reg became part of the game as due to work commitments missed many games in my then local casino if my bum wasn't on the seat in time.

Even now when circumstances are against me I find that late reg gets me to a game I would have had to miss, so I want late reg to continue but be limited which in my opinion is to the 3rd level, which surely must enable 95% or more of the expected field to get to in time.

I also feel re-entries need to be looked at. An advice given to me which I still feel appropriate is to treat the re-entry tourney as a freeze out and play your A game from the first card dealt.

Again, the need to meet huge guarantees seems to be the main driver for re-entries and a huge guarantee grabs attention and gives someone a chance to make a wonderful return possibly life changing). As all things I do in life I want to be successful and approach each game with a positive outlook yet realistically my opportunity is limited due to luck and skill factor (not sure which way round there  :-).

Shows my age but doesn't seem many years ago that the then poker regs, messrs Camel, Trumper, Devilfish, Hendon Mob and more would travel the length and breadth of the land to play in a £100 main event which may have had 120 runners max, freezeout too.

I would love a regular monthly 2/3 day competition which would give a good payout say £100,000/150,000 guarantee and with a buy-in, re-entry structure that would enable DTD to meet the guarantees (failing to make guarantees is not good for DTD long term, it is a business after all) and hopefully satisfy the majority of punters (good luck with that).

 

when i first started playing it was hard to find a freezeout it was all rebuys

rebuys died as people wanted to play freezeouts but re entries have now taken over

boom for the cardroom as they get to charge rake on teh re entry they couldnt on the rebuy

Just a mutual friend of myself and Arb, Tikay :)

Mr Lewis??

Blonde member as well.  cutemofo i think his name.

yes

Are ambitious guarantees fuelling the need for card rooms to max out re-entries in order to make their guarantees??  I would love to know what ratio of players are influenced solely by size of the guarantees being offered by card rooms.  When it comes to sub £500 tournaments - DTD are always the top venue on most peoples list, so does a £300k guarantee verses a £200k tournament really create larger fields of unique players?? or are the numbers the same with more of them players willing to fire several bullets??  both sums of money are substantial so I cant see it making much of a difference to most players.

AKA 'Goldenbollocks'

It's important to disginuish the difference here between whats "good for the one bullet player" and whats "much higher variance for the one bullet players"

If you have 400 unique entrants and 300 re-entries then there is no immediate advantage for players who have entered twice, just as there is no immediate disadvantage to those who have entered only once. The variance is increased as it's very obviously harder to cash a 700 player comp, than a 400 player comp. This is balanced out by the fact the prizepool is increased by 75% so you are now playing for more money, with no increase in your exposure.

The argument about one bullet players being at a big disadvantage because players who can afford multiple bullets can play very lose and call any draw etc in order to build a big stack in for certain incorrect - rather than 20 maniacs in a tournament with £15k for first, you now have 35 maniacs in a tournament with £25k for first, if this is the result of re-entires then your expectation in the tournament will almost certainly increase, ofc the variance will increase with it, but any time in gambling when your upside increases without any more exposure it 99% of the time brings with it higher variance.

Having the bankroll to re-enter multiple times is not instantly profitable, ven for good players... Ken is a pro tourny player, and he has a positive expectation in the tournament (lets say he has 20% ROI in a £500 event) so he is expecting to benefit £100 by entering - this mean that SOMEONE has to lose £100 in this tournament in order for him to win it. Once he is eliminated this is great news for the players with a negative expectation as the £100 they lose to Ken, they no longer lose...

However, now Ken, being adequately bankrolled rolls up to the cash desk and buys in again. Lets say his expectation remains the same (it almost certainly wont) so he buys in for £500 and has a expectation of £600...however he has invested £1,000 in this tournament so his EV overall is now -£400. So the strategy of just buying in and in again and again until you win, is not a profitable one.

(that's not to say ofc that buying in the second time was a mistake for Ken)

This doesn't mean though, that it's not damaging to the recreational player pool, as it is, because instead of playing a 400 runner tourney with 1 Ken, 1 Alex, 1 Stato etc, you are playing a 700 runner comp with 3x Ken's, 2x Alex's and 4x Stato's, so it's going to be much harder to win.

There is also the physiological impact, we've all sat in cash games greatly underrolled and seen guys pulling up 50% of our bankrolls like it's nothing and thinking "how the hell can we win here?! These guys are just going to keeppulling up and up until they get me" and it makes it feel a lot less fair, poker tournaments are supposed to be a completely level playing field - you each come for £x and get Y chips, and play until "someone has it all." Even though in equity terms the re-entries don't really damage the format for recreational players, its very obvious that it makes it FEEL like they do - and I'd certainly feel the same when Id just been busted 16 off the money by some guy I busted out in level 7 -  which is reason enough to get rid of them imo.

Nailed it!

Probably not a great idea to ever try make anyone fold a pair ever in a tournament.

I'm mostly joking of course. Mostly.

I do see the more general point of course, and I did make that point myself in my last post - that the ability to re-enter allows a player more freedom to make the 'best play' without pressures such as tournament life considerations putting psychological pressure on him. So I do agree that multiple re-entries give a (small) advantage to players who are able and willing to re-enter. I just think there are even stronger arguments against multiple re-entry tournaments, in particular that they make the tournament tougher/less value for ALL players, by skewing the pro/rec ratio.

Also, very good post from Lil'Dave whilst I was writing my post, and this bit is especially important IMO:


Perception is often more important than reality.

Yes - it's the perception which does the damage.

 

And the FACT that we're going to be up against three Kens, two Alex's and four Statos.

Nah just one Ken, he's a lucky bastard.

Is the four Stato's stat based on size or ability?

Once he has been eliminated and ran bad/not realised his expectation, it doesn't matter whether he chooses to reenter that day or enter another tournament next week or next month. They are separate investments. His ev on the day or in that specific tournament is just an arbitrary number that means very little. He has already lost the 600 in ev, it shouldn't matter that he can't win this back right now, it should matter that he makes a £100 by hitting the register button. The strategy of buying in again and again for a winning player is an excellent one. Big Ken makes £100 every time he enters, as long as he still plays as well.

ICM dictates that your last chip is worth more than your first. I mean, think about being able to buy in for 1 ante. It'd be great fun, you get a 9x spin on your first hand and you will almost always be in a headsup or maybe 3 way pot. What a life!

In theory, if you shortened the late reg period a bit, then you would get less pros reentering, as they are more likely to bust later on in the day, whereas the weaker players are more likely to bust in level 2.

So the pros should, in theory, be arguing for shorter late reg as they will get the recs re-entering in Level 2 and reduce costs by not having to re-enter themselves?

Pros will always want to re enter unlimited times if they have a positive EV in any event which they will have otherwise, as a pro, they shouldn't be playing the said event.  As Adam said simply by clicking the register button makes a pro money long term.  It never 'costs' a pro money to re enter an event.  They are getting paid in ev long term every time they re enter.

Yes, but that's ken's business. Ken has lost his £500 and now has a chance to make £100, good for Ken.

I'm saying having ken play twice doesn't diminish the equity of a player who enters once. It actually benefits them, as instead of having ken in once and having to find £100 to lose to him, he's actually lost £400 to us all.

However it's not that simple in practice - because just because he's lost it doesn't mean the rec pool wins it, there are now many more pros to pick up this additional equity.

Yeah I kinda knew you hadn't made the mistake I was pointing out, but I wasn't quite sure where I was getting confused. It possibly depends on who Ken loses too and other weird factors like that. I can imagine a scenario in 2002 where you might get an all pro table, and decide to gamble it up to bust out and "reenter" on a fishy table.

Including the new Ken who now gets a shot at his initial investment again.

As he's +EV to win a share of his original loss does this mean that he was in fact more than 120% on his first bullet?

Tbh, it seems like the moral of the story is play cash instead of tournaments.

I think there needs to be a little more clarity on whether a "freezeout" actually allows re-entry too as in tomorrow's PLO Double-chance "freezeout".

I remember being one of many who were surprised at the last one of these when it turned out that one re-entry was allowed despite it being advertised as a freezeout.

One re-entry Ralph

http://www.dusktilldawncasinonottingham.com/result-info.php?id=5250&name=Pokerfets%20Live%20PLO&eid=66029

Late reg I don't have a problem with, boost prize pools etc etc.
Re-entry despite all the arguments and the maths, is very off putting to a lot of lolrecs like myself in larger buy-in tournaments. Even more so if I've Satted in to the tourney, having invested a lot of time qualifying and turning up with only the one shot. All that matters to me is the poker that day, not the long run, as I may only qualify/be able to play once a yr in a big tourney. Whilst being told I got it in gd and still busting by a players decision being based upon their ability to re-enter or having re-entered having made such a decision before, doesn't make the journey home (2 hours + for me)any easier. I suppose the answer is to have,in multiple day 1 tourneys, a true freezeout day 1 that doesn't permit same day re-entries. If the structure takes the fun out of playing poker, I'm not gonna play.

Thanks David, I went looking for the small print this time.

Possibly a little obdurate on my part but I expect a freezeout to be just that.

No,  they are seperate,  when Ken goes in again he is technically trying to win £100 of his original money back....but that money is gone and lost now, so it's not his anymore, it's just money he had a chance to win.

All this though is barely even relevant to people who play 15 comps a yr to try and enjoy the game, regardless of the equity they don't really want to feel like Ken can just throw £2000 at a comp and spoil there chance of winning that comp, which in terms of one comp he defo does.

Where's the real Ken? He'd be giving Barbie one rather than wasting his weekend playing poker FFS!!

Late reg should be up to the first break (a few levels) only. That covers the intended purpose of covering for people running late for whatever reason. People should not be waltzing in at level 5. Ties in with starting stacks being too high these days. The first levels should be important enough to disadvantage anyone buying in even a couple of levels late.

Re-entries should not be in big comps. In a cheap nightly tournament I don't really object as long as the re-entry period is quite short let's say first break/a few levels again. And not every comp should have it. Freezeouts have their place too.

Screw the maths to me it comes down to it feeling unfair. If I enter a big comp the last thing I want is to knock out a good player just for them to buyin again. What's the point of even bothering if they're gonna do that. How do you beat someone who re-enters over and over knowing you can't/won't do the same thing yourself. And it isn't just one person it's a group of people. Fuck that.

And if the £300/10k/45 no shenanigans did show up again I'd happily play :)

Won't smaller starting stacks and seriously big blinds at the start turn a good structure into a crap shoot?

I agree with LilDave, in that re-entry doesn't really hurt a recreational player's expectation, for any specific live MTT.
I also agree, that the perception of some recreational players, is that it is a very negative thing for them, and that this is bad for poker.

However, there are a lot of recreational players playing these re-entry events quite happily. These, typically, appear to be the ones still in love with poker. These players would probably still play at Dusk Till Dawn without re-entry, but would put some of there poker money elsewhere, if the tournaments were smaller. I played the PokerFest Mini at the weekend, and was sat with players from Leeds, Bristol, Cornwall and Worcestershire. These players had travelled up for a £70 MTT (although at least one was staying for the Main Event). They had done this because they could win a decent chunk, and they could re-enter if they busted.

There are lots of serious players & full time players, who are pumping lots more money through Dusk Till Dawn, because the tournaments are both bigger, and re-entry.

I am guessing a little here, but at least some of the people who are uncomfortable with re-entry, are no longer completely in love with poker. If re-entry ceased, they would probably play a little more, but, in at least some cases, would still only be occasional players.

It's a numbers game. For the good of live poker venues, it's important to get money churning through MTT's, and feet through the door. It is quite probable that any upside in returning players by removing re-entry, would be quite small in comparison to the loss of revenue as a result. This is not good.

I have a lot of sympathy for this post. At the end of the day, profitability for the venue has to be a serious consideration.

No. It's rebuys and re-entries that turn tournaments (especially evening tournaments) into a crap shoot.

The old deepstack had 10k with blinds starting at 25/50. A 200 big blind start. That's more than enough. The 40/45 minute clock keeps the tournament ticking over nicely with players getting eliminated as it goes on and the average stack kept reasonable.

When you allow re-entries you end up in a situation where at a point where a decent % of the field should be eliminated you're instead left with a much higher number of players. A tournament that can last as long as it needs to can structure itself to deal with this but in reality tournaments have to finish by a certain point. So what generally happens is the blinds quickly catch up (faster clocks to deal with the higher number of chips in play) and the mid-late stage of the game ends up being crap shooty.

I went to DTD and played the £25 re-entry. I had a few beers and had fun but I can't say the structure of the competition was in any way a highlight. Bring back the old £75 5k/30min :)

What do the blinds start at now?

The old Friday night £75 freezeout was the best tourney ever
5k starting stack and a 45 min clock, late reg first 2 levels before the break if I remember correctly

This.

I think they start at 100/200/25 starting stack 50k. Could be wrong though.

This is todays High Roller.


If late reg is available until start of day 2 is it worth having a day 1? Surely this is late reg overkill?

I thought it was 30 minutes? With the £50/£25 being 4k/24m and 3k/24m?

Either way I imagine those days are long gone. Chip inflation or something.

Start a nice structured tournament at 6:30 with late rage until 7;45 then at 8 start a turbo with late registration until 9pm/

Structure both to finish around same time. If you bust the first one at 8 instead of re entering when blinds are very high you buy into turbo at start.

Everyone is happy.

A one off 'retro' £300 2008 deepstack weekend would be good.

This

Yeh reckon they should do this and see how many turn up. Call it retro weekend and have all the old school comps. A £150 on a Sunday, £75 on a Friday night.

A good old £1/2 game with £2k stacks as well :D

£20 unlimited rebuy super sat on Friday night for the main event thrown in as well and all ipads/iphones/headphones/hoodies are banned for the weekend.

Hell , they will all be smoking next !

If the knife-edge tension only comes in later levels then most people, who have been knocked out, don't get to experience knife-edge tension. I would address this for very obvious reasons, not least because high octane emotion is the huge appeal of tournaments and thus the magic formula for operators. In the wsop ME there are no re-buys, no late entries and knife-edge tension from hand one. This is a popular comp and a format most casual players relate too.

Are new players attracted by the concept of re-entry? Are they more and more attracted with every £10k added to first prize? Or are they simply attracted by the experience of playing, esp in a high intensity format? Personally my focus would be on driving the most exhilarating experience possible. Once you have bods thru the door the hard work is done and there are many ways to max revenue, it's not like reducing revenue in one comp means you have now lost that spend from the customer entirely. The pro players won't agree but then again driving new players is the honey hole here.

When I started reading the thread, my first thoughts were very much what Dave and Alex ended up posting. The re-entry option will give a small advantage to the Pro's, sure, but so small as to be largely insignificant to the recreational players in that tournament. It's more of a perception problem.  In reality, the positives FAR outway the negatives by providing huge guarantees and the club absolutely packed on Deepstack weekends and festivals.

Late Reg (as it is now) is all about giving both local and travelling players more options. That is what DTD is all about. We all have commitments outside of poker and it allows more people to play depending on their circumstances. It is most definitely not an advantage to late reg a tournament and have less big blinds relative to the average.

As I think Rob said, he had tried to revert to the old way of short late reg and true freezeouts and it flopped. Rob and Simon must have all the data necessary to see how overall numbers were affected. Players just will not travel if traffic means they might get to DTD and then not be able to play. Players also won't travel if there is a risk they turn up to a main event, have their AA cracked, and then have to drive home. Recently the deepstacks and festivals are the busiest they've been with massive guarantees largely being met. There's the proof that the current late reg and re-entry policy is spot on imo.

As with many of these opinion polls, those that make the effort to post are often the ones that feel strongly against and want some change. Those that are happy with the status quo are far more likely to not make the effort to post and therefore we don't see a representative sample.

As mentioned above, I also thought Rob and Simon should test the idea again with an "Old Skool" festival with short late reg/true freezouts  and see how popular it is. I'm pretty certain that the numbers will give a definitive answer.

IMHO it would be a huge mistake for the future of the club to change what is clearly working very well at the moment.

I don't think you can use the WSOP Main event as a comparison. That is an entirely different, and very special tournament!

If only Carlsberg did a mini/European/British equivalent at DTD with bracelets etc huh....

Theoretically, I'm firmly in the old school camp and would like genuine freezeouts in slightly bigger comps, probably like to see late reg/re-entry periods (if we're going to have them) cut too. Personally find it extremely dull to not see the player count reduce for an interminable period. I like the GUKPT side event structures with stack sizes that remind me of old times and give perfectly decent play for short comps. With all that said, I completely agree with this post and the one from Jakally earlier.

Can't see the rush of old school fans to retro comps outweighing the losses to footfall as well as prize pools. Things change, I choose not to move with it generally but I don't expect anyone to turn the clock back to suit a dwindling number of old timers - I'm certain it would be bad for business and I'm an expert on business

I like the idea of an occasional Freezeout weekend / Festival.
Great for a change, and a better option for those that don't like re-entry comps.

remember the re-entry format has created some monster prizepools for small buyin events.

Recently DTD held a £500 6-handed tournament that had £60,000 for first place, 120x buyins, for a 6max, do you remember the WPT 500 last year? £140,000 for first place in a competition that cost £500 to enter, 280x your buyin, it's phenomenal really that in Nottingham you can have a chance to win £140k for a monkey buyin.

With the rough, comes the smooth.

You know there are ways to acquire money that don't involve gambling right? :)


I always quite liked events that had speedy early levels and then slowed down a bit later on. You just avoid too much time spent with cash game blind ratios - it's the risk of ruin that makes tournaments fun right?

I think it's quite cool that DTD have been open enough that people are requesting retro tournaments :)

HI Rob

I have not read many replies on here. I wanted to write my post individually.
Id happily travel the 4hr round trip to play at DTD at least once a week. I don't. Dusk till Dawn offers the best playing experience I know. Iv got the time and money to play at least once a week but I don't. Here are my reasons......in no particular order

1) I STRONGLY disagree with the apportioning of the prizepool. I disagree with it on a few levels.
 a) I think the payout structure is too top heavy. I also believe in paying only 10% of the field. In a multi entry tournament(which is what most are) this should be 10% of unique entries.
     Min cashing should start at 3 x buy-in and work upwards. For the Pokerfest Mini Live that's just finished 1st got 21000 and 9th got 1050. that's a big difference. too big.
     the final 9 were playing for aprox 55k. a payout structure for the final 9 like this would have been much fairer in my opinion.
     9th 3% 8th 4% 7th 5% 6th 6% 5th 8% 4th 10% 3rd 15% 2nd 20% 1st 29%.   These are percentages of the remaining prizepool by the way
 b) If there is a tournament that costs £100 to enter and is guaranteed at 50K and you get 600runners I do not think its fair to take money out of the prizepool and allocate it as seats into your next big game. the prizepool of 60K should be paid out as cash prizes. if on the other hand you only got 400 runners and DTD has to add 10k then by all means add the 10k in as seats into your next big game. its your money and its fair enough.

the way I see it is that we pay dtd reg fee for the purpose of hosting it. dtd also benefit when we spend money in the casino area and buy food and drink. dtd provide guarantees to get more players through your door. that's the marketing strategy. any money in the prizepool generated by entries of players is THE PLAYERS MONEY, unless the tournament fails to hit guarantee.

as for the re-entry and late reg questions
I think a balanced approach works best.
1 re-entry per day. imagine travelling 2hrs and getting busted early. not much fun. having the ability to try again ONCE is fair and doesn't really give anyone with deep pockets too much of an edge.
late reg should be kept to the 1st 2hrs of play. 2hrs is more than enough lee way for motorway mishaps etc. for players who don't like to play the first few levels there are other options. buy in in advance. your stack is live from the get go. turn up anytime you want but your stack will get blinded out.  

 :goodpost:

Really like this idea. 

Hope all u re entry haters support Dtd next week

http://www.dusktilldawnpoker.com/blog.php?profile=4&id=524

Dusk Till Dawn Live Tournaments Re-Entry & Late Entry Announcement:

Blog Link Here (Please help spread the word to fellow DTD members)
http://www.dusktilldawnpoker.com/blog.php?profile=4&id=524

As most DTD players know, I am not a fan of same day re-entry, extended late registration and highest stack goes through tournament formats {outside of High Roller tournaments} because I believe these formats;

* create an unlevel playing field for smaller bankrolls and satellite qualifiers

* discourage new players into the game

* increase the crap shoot factor by reducing the average BB of the tournament

* encourage players not well versed in short stack strategy to lose their money quicker

* reduce the integrity of the tournament with players joining when over 50% of the field have already busted

* reduce the integrity of the tournament by encouraging players to spin up a big stack

Therefore, over the coming months, I have instructed DTD to phase out these formats from our live tournament schedules, starting with our regular club schedule and our next 2 major festivals : the Grand Prix and WPT UK.

In the short term, this will make it more 20% more difficult to make our guarantees. We will tweak our regular comps, but we will hold our huge guarantees on major festivals and make up the deficit by qualifying more players on partypoker.

A few years ago, I tried to do this and failed, and DTD reverted back - but I feel we are in much stronger position now with established annual festivals and a better qualification strategy.

Ultimately, this is not a commercial decision, I have not even worked out the maths, this decision is simply about DTD providing poker products that we ourselves can be proud of - we all need to feel good about what we do or what's the point?

I am sure some players will moan, but there is plenty of choice out there with other tours and venues offering same day re-entry and extended late registration and highest stack, so no players will really suffer.

Please Note:

* We will still offer 'limited' late registration for those players that get stuck in traffic, down to 100BBs, so 3 or 4 levels depending on the structure

* In multi-day tournaments will still offer players the option to re-enter into the next Day 1, which means the last Day 1 will always be a complete freezeout

* For some events, such as Grand Prixs, we will offer 2 flights to fit in with players day and night time commitments

Regardless of the short term impact of this strategy this is the direction we are committed to for the long haul.

Keep The Faith Rob

It will take time though.

A lot of those who have been put off from the re-entry, etc., will not be eagerly watching DTD for an announcement from Rob that things changed. Poker players, especially the "fishy recs", are creatures of habit. Once that habit is changed for whatever reason, it can take a while (if ever) to get it back.

There are lots of recs who have stopped coming, probably also realising that the comps have been costing them more money than they wanted to spend. Getting these back is going to be difficult. Much easier/cheaper keeping an existing customer than attracting a new one or getting an old one back.

Poker players (again I mean the recs) are lazy and want an easy life. Confusing re-entries, stack forfeiting, etc.,  all make it less enticing and possibly to many it seems liked less fun. Rightly or wrongly, many will perceive that there's less value (both short and long-term), sand perception is everything if these recs are going to be coming back time and time again.

Bold move by Rob, but ultimately the right one I feel.

Has to be good for the cash/table games revenue streams as well for the rest of the business.  Shame nothing has been done about the seats being taken out of the prizepool issue which is the major reason why i don't play much any more. 

Yh this is fantastic news for the dtd cash games, now they'll start earlier and hopefully more people will give them a go :) big fan of this change :)

This, definitely. Will be making a trip up soon for sure.

This!

This is definitely the way forward and totally agree with Arbboy about removing all the seats from the prizepool.

I think that as a whole the recreational players like the added seats thing, and they are undoubtedly good for the economy as a whole. I'm always hearing people telling their mates how they won their seat to x event through y smaller comp, then all their mates ask what's that and want to try and qualify to play it as well. Gets so many people into events they otherwise wouldn't have played and get that experience of playing bigger and more prestigious events like the WPT.

Those bigger events are full of stories about Bob who came 3rd who won his seat through the XXL or whatever. I think they're a win/win.

I do think they need to be carefully marketed though so people don't think they're added to the prizepool, which some people seem to think they are.

Really happy to see the changes.

The issue of seats as part of the prize pool could be resolved pretty simply by making the seats transferable, or usable in any future event. I kind of agree with Arbboy that where the seats have been paid for by the players it is wrong to limit their use to just the one event. Equally, if the seats are effectively paid for by DTD/Party then limitations are less contentious.

Now, where's that Golden Chip?

really positive changes -  will be looking to support over next few weeks/months

Thanks for your feedback.

Few Points.

1. Min Cash - very hard to get to min cash X 3 and pay the big 1st prize players demand, I dont know anywhere that pays min cash x 3
2. I agree hat 10% of entries is fine for a re-entry tournamant, we paid 10% of unqiue entries once and players went crazy at Simon
3. In completely disagree with you that it's not fair to include seats in prizepools, when it clearly advertised that way, players have a choice before they enter, whether we continue with that I am not sure, perhaps we should so all seats online. I can tell you players are 50:50 on this, we have ran comps without seats on prizepool and we get asked to add them back. I would say we have added £500,000 of free seats in 2015, we can GTE less with no seats, no big deal to me.
4.This myth about tournament players spending money on casino, food and drink, is a myth. Tournament players have the lowest average spend per head of all DTD customers except when we do major festivals - We lose money on every tournament players less than £330 buy-in, i.e, DTD and the Major festival players are subsiding these players. This is something I have been happy to do for years despite the moaning I get.
KTF

Rob

No problem at all with late reg , what really puts me on tilt is the moneybags who sits tanking then goes "I feel like gambling cause I can always rebuy "

I am 99.999% sure we wont be doing any re-entry tournaments the same day at DTD. I think the DTD Team all want to go in a different direction.

Hi Rob,

Quick question- This XXL 30+5 tournament with 2 reloads, is this basically a triple stack comp or do you need to pay an extra 30 quid to reload? Or have the website not been updated to show the tournament's are now freeze outs?

Thanks,

Shane

I have read about the recent changes, and whilst its a step in the right direction, for me personally, the changes affect the things I care the least about. the main things I do care about are as yet still not to my liking. 

As a side note the cash game scene appears to be booming at the moment, hats off to Will etc for all they've done to sort this out. Fantastically run, can't think of anything I'd do differently.

I Think Rob should change tact and just do what he thinks is best for his business. Everything he tries, usually at significant cost, always has a polarised view from poker players who can't help but constantly moan.

I supported them this week and there was a re-entry!!

Frustrating to say the least.

Re entry in what?

In a freezeout.

Last night's 8-max

http://www.dusktilldawncasinonottingham.com/result-info.php?id=5308&name=8-max-high-roller&eid=67721

Definitely says freezeout.

You still cashed ;)

And it was only Fred that re-entered and that's just dead money in the prizepool anyway...

Always happy to contribute.

Fully agree with this guy. And especially about added seats. Now I know DTD argument about GTDs etc. My sulution for that is simple:

You are the business. If you cannot reach GTDs - don't offer them as big. I really doubt you will have significant difference in numbers if you advertise 850k gtd instead of 1million gtd. This added seats thing is absolutely ridiculous. In smaller comps it takes sometimes more than 20% of the prize pool!

Payout structure: well isn't it a time to start announcing payout structure before 'shuffle up and deal'? In other words it is very simple to have table with if you get X entrants, payouts will be ABCD. Not a rocket science at all. As know min cashes are terrible, and as somebody noticed 20k difference between 1st and 9th in pokerfest is just laughable. 


Overall changes are towards good direction but it looks too litle too late... I think Rob's reason were mentioned many times before original introduction of  those decisions to allow 'rebuy whatever amount of times' by many people including myself. I guess then more or less poker economy starts subtracting then people in charge of it starts thinking. But as I say sounds a bit too litle too late, as we hardly gonna have another Moneymaker moment anytime soon (or more like ever)....

There is no doubt DTD have been innovative over the years always willing to try new ideas. But from replies on here and from my own perspective I believe that the constant changes have cost the club players.

I used to be constantly checking up and coming tournaments at DTD but now find myself checking the site every few weeks or months. Yet I still look to play as many MTT's as possible but play elsewhere most of the time. My reasons are similar to previous entries on here.

I now dislike multiple re entries. They have changed the game and make tournaments more of a gamble then a skill game.
I used to like re entry MTT's and late reg. for the extra value they add to the prize pool but over recent years I have completely changed my opinion.

I dislike the 'added seats' in the prize pool. They detract from payouts and mean that you can go quite deep in a tournament but the payout does not seem to reflect how well a player has done to get that deep (if they don't make the added seats part of the payouts).

I echo many views on here that would prefer to see smaller more realistic guarantees rather than added seats and multiple re entries.

I dislike the 50k starting stack with blinds starting 100/200/25. This structure is not representative of all of the other main tours in the UK.

It's just my opinion for what ever it's worth but I would like to see DTD get back to very limited re entries or freeze outs and drop the 50k starting stack structure. ( this months Deep Stack structure looks great. 30k and most if not all levels back in).

Also a more constant schedule would renew my interest rather than the constant changes of the past few years.

Have to say I agree with this post completely.    Have been missing from DTD for a couple of years myself due to all the changes.      However the club does seem to happily thrive and I guess I am part of a small minority looking at the numbers DTD achieves.  I have found i enjoy smaller local tournaments more rather than the 4 hour round trip to DTD, but I do wish the club success

this is 2nd hand info to me but apparently DTD made a £5million loss last year

very sad to hear.

its not a case of I told you so but obv things aren't going very well for that to be true.

in my humble opinion I think that's more down to how things are than a lack of interest and support from uk poker players

give the players what they want and they will travel, they will part with their hard earned money, they will play live poker at DTD

duncan and john, you both saw the blog a month ago that detailed the changes to late reg and re-entry policy?

its here, in case you didn't

http://www.dusktilldawnpoker.com/blog.php?profile=4&id=524

yea I saw the blog.....
you must have missed my reply after this announcement, it was reply #154

I will remind you

I said something to the effect of, whilst this in a step in the right direction these changes affect the ''problems/procedures I care least about.
the thing that matters the most to me was the payout structure in general and the seats paid for out of tournament entries.

In the weekday evening tournies the format is freezeout with 10K start stack 50/100 start blinds 20 minutes level, shot clock and no reloads or rentries. No seats taken from Gtd prizepools. Seems to tick all the boxes imho

Hi Tighty.   No mate I didnt, thanks for pointing it out.  Kind of switched off to all things DTD a while back so a bit behind

I'm not going to travel a 200mile round trip to play a £30 freeze on a weekday am I? obvs I wast specific enough