Poll: Your views required please on Re-entry tournaments

[THISnTHAT]

For me personally a re-buy  Is a must, travelling for 3 hrs and maybe going out on the usual bad beat lol after a couple of hours can be frustrating, I think only one re- buy on the day,
Unlimited re-buys is a no no !
Also usual great work at DTD , keep it up!!!!

[jgcblack]

Has to be a Re-entry and its not even close.

ty.

[TightEnd]

More votes required please, looking for a decent sample size of members

thank you

[Junior Senior]

So far clearly showing that having to wait to the next day to re enter is not favoured at all.

[KarmaDope]

Personal preference is no re-entry at all in bigger tournaments, but that's solely due to size of bankroll.

Would never vote for unlimited re-entry - just call it a rebuy and stop taking the extra rake ffs. Pure profit winner, which is why I can see it coming very shortly.

The current system works, I think, no need for change.

[Karabiner]

If we are talking about DTD tourneys here one thing that I would like to mention again although it might be something of a sidetrack is the payout structures as despite previous calls for an ovehaul they do remain flawed and unaltered from the outset when Rob(who came from gala Nottm.) designed the original graph.

The minimum payout of 1.5 x the buyin  is considered too small by most people for starters.

The payouts should increase incrementally with each increase being larger than the previous one such as 2%, 2.5%, 3.5%, 5%, 7%, 9.5% and so on which they do not currently as there are instances where they jump up 2.5% and then the next jump is only 2% for example.

I know that this was discussed at length in the "no deals" thread/poll some months ago where there seemed to be a huge majority of people who were in favour of a flattened payout structure including a a superb post by skolsuper which even included an excellent template for payouts as implemented by GUKPT events, but despite all of the suggestions there was no response that I am aware of and the payouts remain the same.

I'm a big fan of DTD and have been since the very outset so I just want to see things evolve in a positive way.

[TightEnd]

I know that DTD are considering payout structures currently. Looking at re-entries now, obviously..then a thorough debate on payout structures. I will then send Rob and Simon the comments made during the "deals debate" as Keys and others made some excellent points

[ripple11]

The Genting tour are doing it slightly different to the options above.

Only one re-entry, which can be the same day, or another start day.......which seems OK.

[nirvana]

Either none or unlimited. I think this is the only logical conclusion as most things eventually travel to their logical extreme.

I would favour none based on my ability level.

I'd expect great players like Dean Morris to favour unlimited.

I can't imagine why anyone would favour limited re-entries.

If I was DTD and wanted to continue with very ambitious guarantees;  I'd probably just favour unlimited over none as prob more to gain from unlimited than to be lost from alienating people who would prefer none

[Gemini Kings]

I prefer re-entry. and also the option to re enter on the same day so that means a total of 4.

But higher on my list of wants is amendments to the payout structure. The min cashes at DTD are the worst I've seen for live venues. I had already decided not to play any more Monte Carlos (if there are any more planned) for that reason only and probably won't enter any more of the £500's unless I satellite in. Payouts are far too top heavy. The difference between 1st and 2nd is usually huge. A deep finish should be rewarded with a decent payout but unless you're in the top 3 they are very disappointing. Better payouts for the lower finishers will put more cash in more players pockets and keep them returning more often.

[aaron1867]

Limit it to one a day.

If it's unlimited, then it's most definitely putting an advantage in place to those with deeper pockets.

[BorntoBubble]

i think the option of having 1 re entry is a good idea and this can be used at any point weather it be on the same day or the next day then players can pick and choose

I do think the re entry system favours the sharks with larger bankrolls i think is more likely that there will be a loarger proportion of good players re entring rather then the fish because the fish usually are made up of sat qualifiers that are very likely to only fire one bullet!

[SuuPRlim]

If it's unlimited, then it's most definitely putting an advantage in place to those with deeper pockets.

It isn't actually at all, although I understand how in one specific vacuum instance it seems like it is....

It actually offers no long term advantage at all to the people buying in more than once, what it does do though is it makes the prize pools bigger (albeit a little tougher in field strength) which is great if you're on 1 bullet. a £1k with a £150,000 prize pool is now, for you, a £1k with a £350,000 prize pool

[BorntoBubble]

If it's unlimited, then it's most definitely putting an advantage in place to those with deeper pockets.

It isn't actually at all, although I understand how in one specific vacuum instance it seems like it is....

It actually offers no long term advantage at all to the people buying in more than once, what it does do though is it makes the prize pools bigger (albeit a little tougher in field strength) which is great if you're on 1 bullet. a £1k with a £150,000 prize pool is now, for you, a £1k with a £350,000 prize pool

and the bigger the prize pools the more likely people are going to make an effort to "take a shot" either step up a little or take a few more bullets at satellittes therefore swelling the prixze pool even more

[skolsuper]

If it's unlimited, then it's most definitely putting an advantage in place to those with deeper pockets.

It isn't actually at all, although I understand how in one specific vacuum instance it seems like it is....

It actually offers no long term advantage at all to the people buying in more than once, what it does do though is it makes the prize pools bigger (albeit a little tougher in field strength) which is great if you're on 1 bullet. a £1k with a £150,000 prize pool is now, for you, a £1k with a £350,000 prize pool

Not an advantage to those with deeper pockets per se, obviously it's a significant problem for those players with deeper pockets who are bad at poker.

Not sure what lilD is getting at here though, obviously if we're talking about winning players then of course reentry makes it worse for the fish. Extrapolate the problem to a heads up tournament where the good player wins 60% (for the sake of argument). Without re-entries, assuming zero rake, his ROI is 20% and thus the fish's ROI is -20%. With a reentry allowed for the good player (Mr. deep-pockets), he wins 1st bullet 60% of the time, then treating the 2nd bullet consistently i.e. he wins 1 buyin 60% of the time and has to do that twice, he wins from 2nd bullet 36% of the time. EV for the fish: 60% of the time, he loses 1, 40% of the time they play on, from where he still loses 1 36% of the time but wins 2 64% of the time:

(0.6*-1)+(0.4*0.36*-1)+(0.4*0.64*+2) = -0.232 = -23.2% ROI

Actually, now I think about it properly, when the fish wins the 1st, loses the 2nd but wins the 3rd all in, the winning player still has a 36% chance to win from there, it's a geometric progression I think and the fish's ROI gets even worse:

(0.4*0.6*0.4*0.6*0.6*-1) = -0.03456 = -3.5% so total -26.7% ROI, without the extra permutations where the chip lead goes back and forth more than 3 times. It probably tends towards 30% or so as x --> infinity

So, without spending any more money himself, the losing player's ROI goes from -20% to -26.7% if the good player is allowed to re-enter once. It gets much, much worse if the fish decides to re-enter as well.

All the above said, I am very much in favour of unlimited re-entries.