Matt Savage changes opinion on Re-Entry tournaments

[Fenix35]

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2013/11/op-ed-reconsider-reentry-events-16858.htm

Although the topic of re-entries has been discussed on the forum before, I think Matt Savage highlights some excellent points for why he thinks re-entries should be reduced. It's a great article and very relevant in the UK scene now as more and more live tournaments (GUKPT, DTD tournaments) are now re-entry.

Now that we've all come more normalised with most tournaments being re-entry these days, what are peoples views on it?

I personally think that re-entries are bad for poker and dries up the poker economy. With so many good tournaments available in the UK these days with lot's of side events, I wonder if re-entries are only further saturating the market. I also wonder from more live cash game players whether they think the increase in re-entries has affected the cash games they play in. Whereas previously if a player had traveled up for say the DTD £300, was unfortunate to bust within the first 2 hours and then to get their poker fix would jump on the cash games, now can re-enter and as the structures are so good these days, might bust again after 10 hours total but no longer feel like they want to immediately sit back down and play cash afterwards.

As for online, I'm very much against re-entry as there are so many tournaments to choose from. If you bust out of one tournament, there's going to be countless other tournaments you can jump into and play straight after which won't give players with deeper pockets/richer backers a further advantage over recreational players or satellite winners which are only going to be in for 1 bullet. As a result, I very rarely play any re-entry tournaments online any more and am quite disappointed that iPoker seems to be following FTPs pattern by introducing re-entry into some of their nightly tournaments.

[Skippy]

Something that I think hasn't been talked about re: DTD and it's big guarantee tournaments it the effect it has on sending it's customer base broke. In any tournament you are taking the gambling money of X number of people and giving it back to 10%, but mostly giving it back to the final 9, and mostly, mostly giving it back to the winner, 2nd and 3rd.

Everybody knows bigger field tourneys are higher variance than smaller ones. Or in other words even if you are really good at poker the longer you have to wait to have a win. None of us are alive long enough to get a big enough sample size to say we are winning players in the Sunday Million* for example, but we can get an idea that we are beating the 180 mans*, and that's not just because there is more than one 180 man a week.

I think re-entries do make things worse as they increase field sizes, so they make any 1 tournament harder to win. OK, you get a bigger prize if you do win, but the additional variance incurred means you can lose a lot before you win. That's before you consider the people who do re-enter.

(* hypothetically. I'm not beating either of these things).

[YEAHMAN123]

Think online and live is different, travelling to a venue to play a comp, go busto early doors and then having nothing to do may be the worst thing ever. It's happened to me before, I've got cash in my pocket but there's no side event on for 5hours! Now I don't play cash and blackjack isn't my game either so your losing a customer! I drive home with money the card room could of had. I understand most of that money goes into the prizepool but at least the player stays in the club/casino and drinks/eats and flicks money on the roulette/blackjack if he fancies it .
I find freezeouts annoying live

[pleno1]

That's what tournament poker is,about though. Survival!

[JGill_DTD]

Personally feel re-entry is required for Main Events. This helps build prizepools, and would definitely put players off without them as Guarantees are lower (less value to travel for) as well as the potential of travelling for however many hours just to bust pre antes and having to get back in your car to travel home again.

Side Events however are probably healthier as freezeouts. Players rarely travel specifically for the sides, the people who want to play them will already be at the venue so wouldn't mind so much to bust and not be able to re-enter. I also agree that online tournaments should be without re-entry due to the ease of being able to play a different tournament.

[SuuPRlim]

I think re-entries should be for tournaments that don't carry any prestige, the 100k's and ept side events etc are perfect for this, imo. Stuff like $25k Bellagio WPT, the WPT 5 Diamond and all bracelet events should not be re-entry, as it damages the integrity of the tournament imo.

Good example - The DTD Monte Carlo, DTD's flagship tournament by many stnds, should not be re-entry, The Big-Game, a tournament designed for the players to suit as many people as possible, create as bigger prizepool as it can within it's paramenters (over by end of saturday, appeals to all levels of players etc) and just be a really good fun event is PERFECT for re-entry.

I think there are too many re-entry events, but it's definitely an excellent concept.

[Ironside]

When I travelled (further than most for a uk comp) I would never travel for a rebuy and thats what I class a re entry as 14 hours travelling sometime for 30 mins play but it shouldn't been about guys flipping in chips because they have deep pockets and cant take risks as they can re enter

[bergeroo]

Have come to the conclusion that the big tournament (with the most satellites) of each tournament series should not be a re-entry. For the side events or whatever then anything goes. But I find it really unfair for satellite winners if they have to play against high rollers who are going to fire multiple bullets. One of the things I love about poker is its democratic nature and level playing field.

Example. I played Masters Classics in Amsterdam recently. On day one I played with Jonathan Karamalikis who busted, as did Steve O'Dwyer on the next table. On day two they both ended up at my table having re-entered (thin made day two brag). I found this quite annoying.

Hope Stars don't ever switch to re-entry for their flagship events, it's one thing they are getting right now. Also welcome the new Sky tournament.

[rfgqqabc]

As a counter to this, I've played two GUKPTs and some of the recreational players love the ability to re-enter. This also makes them much more happy to gamble it up and have a good time. It is really hard to find the balance, and I'd be curious to see a comparison between the ability of the re-entrants. In Blackpool I imagine we could well have seen more recs re-enter, which is better for everyone. They are having a good time, more money comes in and is passed about. Conversely, I think the DTD 300s do suffer a little bit from having people like Alex, Mitch and Stato taking 6x shots including online play. I also don't have any suggestions regarding this though. Finding the right balance is tough. I would probably attach more prestige to a UKIPT title over a GUKPT title though I guess.

[Doobs]

I think Neil already nailed this earlier in the year.

Chris Moorman walks to the counter with his re-entry money, they announce a show of hands if he can re-enter. Moorman has to get on his bike after the inevitable vote.

You may get a few borderlines, if Dubai popped up, you'd be wanting to know if he was planning to go out for dinner in an hour or so etc.

Guy Laliberte would get an honorary lifetime pass.

FWIW I though the Aussie Millions was first with their repechage in event 1?  It was certainly the first time I heard of it.

 

[bergeroo]

As a counter to this, I've played two GUKPTs and some of the recreational players love the ability to re-enter. This also makes them much more happy to gamble it up and have a good time. It is really hard to find the balance, and I'd be curious to see a comparison between the ability of the re-entrants. In Blackpool I imagine we could well have seen more recs re-enter, which is better for everyone. They are having a good time, more money comes in and is passed about. Conversely, I think the DTD 300s do suffer a little bit from having people like Alex, Mitch and Stato taking 6x shots including online play. I also don't have any suggestions regarding this though. Finding the right balance is tough. I would probably attach more prestige to a UKIPT title over a GUKPT title though I guess.

Good points.

I suppose some tournies are re-entry and some aren't, so you can take your pick at which ones you play to what suits you. There is a place for both, but let's hope re-entry doesn't become standard, especially online.

[robyong]

I have made my position clear on re-entry many times - I am against it as an operator but the truth is the majority of players want that option based on our data - even though it may not be good in the long run for the players.

Therefore at DTD - all we have done is reduce our re-entry period s so that we still offer the option to players but there is less time for re-entries. Eg. For our evening comps re-entry is only for 4 levels .

UKIPT and SKY are both freezeouts, in fact all side events are FO for SKY.

As a player though - I am shamed to admit I am 5 x more likely to travel if an event offers the re-entry option I guess here in lies the problem.

I actually like re-buy events (with 50BB stacks) - I would like to see these better structured re-buys make a comeback. For example - a £100 RB would make more money in prizepool that a £250 re-entry and be a better fix for those of us that like a gamble from time to time.

[SuuPRlim]

As a player though - I am shamed to admit I am 5 x more likely to travel if an event offers the re-entry option

No shame Rob, it's like anything a product appeals to different customers in different ways, some people LOVE re-entry, but understand that some people hate it, and some peope HATE it, but hopefully understand why some people like it.

The job of balancing that out and offering the best priducts that most pleases most people in the most ways is not one that I am envious off, but I genuinely think DTD have it done reasonably well and I think most people could find something to complain about from their personal perspective but would agree overall with that sentiment, I'm not sure you'll ever do a LOT better than that on this subject.

[Skippy]

I have made my position clear on re-entry many times - I am against it as an operator but the truth is the majority of players want that option based on our data - even though it may not be good in the long run for the players.

Therefore at DTD - all we have done is reduce our re-entry period s so that we still offer the option to players but there is less time for re-entries. Eg. For our evening comps re-entry is only for 4 levels .

UKIPT and SKY are both freezeouts, in fact all side events are FO for SKY.

As a player though - I am shamed to admit I am 5 x more likely to travel if an event offers the re-entry option I guess here in lies the problem.

I actually like re-buy events (with 50BB stacks) - I would like to see these better structured re-buys make a comeback. For example - a £100 RB would make more money in prizepool that a £250 re-entry and be a better fix for those of us that like a gamble from time to time.

Speaking of rebuys, a long time ago you used to run a £10 UL rebuy on a Wednesday night that used to fill the club (so I remember it, anyway). Maybe you should bring something like that back?