At which point do we forfeit the chips and try again?

[smurf]

So you can keep your less than 25k stack and join day 2 with a handful of big blinds or you can forfeit the chips and start again at the first big blind.

surely if you were prepared to pay for re entry then with 5-10 hands to go you would be shoving your small stack anyway to try and double/triple up or bust so you can re enter the next day 1.

It does seem a strange option to have offered players.

[tikay]

So you can keep your less than 25k stack and join day 2 with a handful of big blinds or you can forfeit the chips and start again at the first big blind.

surely if you were prepared to pay for re entry then with 5-10 hands to go you would be shoving your small stack anyway to try and double/triple up or bust so you can re enter the next day 1.

It does seem a strange option to have offered players.

Yes - but the players never knew this option was available until after play had ended on Day 1a, according to the OP.

Maybe - & I'm not being rude or cynical here, just thinking out loud - they had less runners than anticipated or hoped for?

Re-entries are fine, if you like that sort of thing, but this was a different thing entirely, assuming it is being reported correctly, & I don't think Boba has any reason not to.

[titaniumbean]

Gotta love when TD's make things up as they go along.

[outragous76]

Gotta love when TD's make things up as they go along.

[edgascoigne]

I remember reading an excellent piece by Galfond (what's new) regards how your equity fluctuates with stack size. Essentially his point was that it's hugely inelastic on day 1 of large field, deepstack comps, which is I guess kind of obvious ("you can't win it today son") but is something I often remember if things don't go my way early.

[cambridgealex]

Leaving aside the question about whether or not we should do this at 10BB or whatever

How can they change the rules half way through the tournament?

Plus - now they've done it once won't that make a change to the way that the latter stages of Day 1a plays out in future?

It just feels wrong.


I think I'd forfeit 24,750 if I was rolled to do it - and from the individual's viewpoint, forfeiting a shortstack is better than donking them off to the competition so that you can re-enter.

But it still feels wrong

20bb???!

I'd drawn the line at 5/6bb probably

[Evilpengwinz]

I would say never.

It might be +EV to forfeit a short stack and start Day 1B with another starting stack, but doesn't mean we should.

Even if forfeiting a 2bb stack so we can play Day 1B is +EV, we need to factor in that Day 1B could be better spent playing something else which could be +EV. I would argue that going home and grinding online the next day if that's a possibility, or playing live cash during Day 1B, then playing Day 2 with whatever stack you finished Day 1A with is going to be more +EV than forfeiting our stack and getting a new starting stack on Day 1B.

The only situation where I might consider it would be a WSOP bracelet event and I want to give myself a better shot at winning a bracelet instead of taking a 5bb stack through to Day 2.

[david3103]

Leaving aside the question about whether or not we should do this at 10BB or whatever

How can they change the rules half way through the tournament?

Plus - now they've done it once won't that make a change to the way that the latter stages of Day 1a plays out in future?

It just feels wrong.


I think I'd forfeit 24,750 if I was rolled to do it - and from the individual's viewpoint, forfeiting a shortstack is better than donking them off to the competition so that you can re-enter.

But it still feels wrong

20bb???!

I'd drawn the line at 5/6bb probably

blahblahblah - my major point was the query about whether this should even be allowed to happen.

I reconsidered later in the thread

I think I'd forfeit 24,750 if I was rolled to do it

You would forfeit a starting stack in order to pay for another starting stack the next day?

my initial response was based on being very over-rolled for the tournament. Having read the more intelligent and thoughtful responses, probably not

The concept of being able to do this still feels wrong anyway

[Royal Flush]

Why shouldn't it be allowed to happen? You are telling me people can voluntarily bust themselves out of a tournament and we want to discourage this, why?

[david3103]

Why shouldn't it be allowed to happen? You are telling me people can voluntarily bust themselves out of a tournament and we want to discourage this, why?

It feels wrong.

I may have the wrong feeling about it, it's likely I do, but which would you prefer - Phil Ivey/Greg Merson/Jason Mercier making Day2 with <5BB or having him sat to your left on Day1b with a full stack?

Also - this seems to have been an ad hoc decision by the organisers and announced at the end of the day's play. It's a major change to the way in which the tournament is structured and run, is that OK?

[Royal Flush]

Also - this seems to have been an ad hoc decision by the organisers and announced at the end of the day's play. It's a major change to the way in which the tournament is structured and run, is that OK?

I disagree, it was always advertised as a re-entry for day 1b, anyone who would forefit a stack at the end of day 1 is also the kinda person who would have just punter a stack at the end of day 1 if it was short. The only situation i see is the poor guy who loses a pot on the last hand of the night and has 2bb left and now has to wait 36hrs to come back, why not give them a chance?

Phil Ivey/Jason Mericier would have busted/doubled 10 minutes prior

[david3103]

Also - this seems to have been an ad hoc decision by the organisers and announced at the end of the day's play. It's a major change to the way in which the tournament is structured and run, is that OK?

I disagree, it was always advertised as a re-entry for day 1b, anyone who would forefit a stack at the end of day 1 is also the kinda person who would have just punter a stack at the end of day 1 if it was short. The only situation i see is the poor guy who loses a pot on the last hand of the night and has 2bb left and now has to wait 36hrs to come back, why not give them a chance?

Phil Ivey/Jason Mericier would have busted/doubled 10 minutes prior

To my mind there is a difference between re-entry when you've bust and being allowed to simply surrender your chips because you don't fancy grinding a short stack on Day 2.

As for 'the poor guy who lost the last pot of the night' isn't that just poker? Unlucky.

[Royal Flush]

As for 'the poor guy who lost the last pot of the night' isn't that just poker? Unlucky.

So we shouldn't have re-entry at all then. That's a perfectly fine stance to take, one i probably agree with. If we allow re-entry though then i'm not going to stand in the way of someone who wants to just bust out of the tournament and leave their money in the prize pool.

[smashedagain]

It was advertised as re entry James but it looks like the surrendering your chips was a last minute decision by the TD. Obv I could be wrong about that and most of the field could have known that surrendering your chips was an option.
I have never heard of surrendering chips. Do you know of any other comps that this has been allowed in?

[Royal Flush]

It was advertised as re entry James but it looks like the surrendering your chips was a last minute decision by the TD. Obv I could be wrong about that and most of the field could have known that surrendering your chips was an option.
I have never heard of surrendering chips. Do you know of any other comps that this has been allowed in?

Yeah i played WPT Jacksonville in April and it was an option. As it was 18 people made it to day 2 from day 1a and i doubt any of them took the option, however if they did it would have been good for everyone else surely?