Tourney Opinions on rebuy options (1 Viewer)

[JustinInMN]

Who is on first?

I don't know...

 

[SendThatStack]

Right, but if you were down to say 1,500 chips, you would have to double up three straight times to get back above water. That's..... not too likely.

True but that doesn’t justify overpaying to get back to a start stack.

 

[BGinGA]

True but that doesn’t justify overpaying to get back to a start stack.

You keep losing sight that players aren't forced to surrender chips to re-buy -- they can always wait to bust out, just like a normal re-buy, or continue to play short-stacked, just like normal. It's merely an extra option for those who choose to do it.

If you don't see any value, then don't do it. But many others do see the value in surrendering chips to get a full re-buy stack, without a) giving their opponents more chips (by all-in dumping), and b) waiting on chance to determine when they can re-buy (allowing them to play more hands with a full stack). When (or if) to surrender simply becomes a strategy decision.


Take the example of a 10-handed table of 10K starting stacks (100,000 chips in play). Player A has only 1500 chips remaining, and is deciding between a) to shove at next opportunity trying to double up and re-buy if he busts, or b) surrender and re-buy immediately.

If Player A shoves and loses, he re-buys a new stack of 10,000 chips and has 9.09% of the chips in play (10k/110k), with the prize pool containing 11 buy-ins.

If Player A surrenders and re-buys a new stack of 10,000 chips, he has 9.22% of the chips in play (10000/108500), with the prize pool containing 11 buy-ins.

So it's up to Player A to determine whether or not his chances of turning that T1500 short-stack into something valuable is worth more than the 0.13% equity gain by immediately surrendering, and whether or not his overall chances of winning are improved by immediately getting to play hands with a full stack vs a short stack (few things are worse than getting dealt a monster hand when holding very few chips, especially if you could have had a full stack instead). To many, the decision is pretty clear when the chip stack size is very low, relative to other stack sizes.

Interestingly, the more chips that a player surrenders, the greater the equity gain by surrendering (which is offset and must be balanced by the improved playability of the larger short-stack). Finding that optimum surrender/play-on line is part of the strategy decision.

Having the option to surrender is not a detriment -- it can only work in the favor of short-stacked players.

 

[DoubleEagle]

[URL=http://www.sherv.net/][/URL]

 

[SendThatStack]

You dont need to turn the t1500 short stack into something valuable, it already has value.

 

[DoubleEagle]

You dont need to turn the t1500 short stack into something valuable, it already has value.

You post here looking for advice and have gotten many excellent suggestions from several very experienced tournament players and tournament directors. Yet, you reject everything.

I suggest you just continue doing things your way, using your vast experience and tournament directing skills.

 

[SendThatStack]

You post here looking for advice and have gotten many excellent suggestions from several very experienced tournament players and tournament directors. Yet, you reject everything.

I suggest you just continue doing things your way, using your vast experience and tournament directing skills.

Its just a discussion... I see the surrender option as a poor way to run a game. Still havent seen an explanation for why rebuy at or below starting stack is unfair, but it must be because BG said so.

 

[bigdonkey]

Its just a discussion... I see the surrender option as a poor way to run a game. Still havent seen an explanation for why rebuy at or below starting stack is unfair, but it must be because BG said so.

He's stated it multiple times. What you have failed to do is explain why it's fair for someone who has lost chips to be able to but the cheap lead over a player who has won chips.

 

[SendThatStack]

Everybody has the option to “buy the chip lead” before the very first hand. So pokerstars has been running unfair rebuy mtts all these years?

 

[bigdonkey]

Everybody has the option to “buy the chip lead” before the very first hand. So pokerstars has been running unfair rebuy mtts all these years?

Not if it's available to everyone.

 

[SendThatStack]

Not if it's available to everyone.

That’s what I’ve been saying this entire time.

 

[bigdonkey]

Perhaps I misunderstood. I thought you were advocating only stacks below the starting value be allowed to purchase additional chips.

 

[SendThatStack]

@BGinGA so has pokerstars been running unfair mtts this whole time?

 

[Mojo1312]

@BGinGA so has pokerstars been running unfair mtts this whole time?

You are asking a loaded question that serves no good purpose. Take it up with your group of players. They are the ones whose input you should be seeking.

You may also want to consider directing some of your excess energy to a charitable cause.

 

[SendThatStack]

You are asking a loaded question that serves no good purpose. Take it up with your group of players. They are the ones whose input you should be seeking.

You may also want to consider directing some of your excess energy to a charitable cause.

It doesnt take much energy to make a forum post. I want an answer other than just being told Im wrong by the forum expert.

 

[Gobbs]

@BGinGA so has pokerstars been running unfair mtts this whole time?

I wouldn't use PokerStars as a good source for anything. You're talking about a site that, for years, didn't even know how to move a button properly.

PokerStars isn't worried about what is fair, they are worried about what is going to put the most coin in their pockets.

I'm not saying you are right or wrong, I'm just saying that using PokerStars as a source for what is fair is about the equivalent of trying to say your clothes are awesome because "the salesperson said I look really good in these plaid pants."

 

[longflop]

I look really good in these plaid pants

Poor example, EVERYONE looks good in plaid pants.

 

[grantc54]

3. What I call a Pre-Paid Rebuy. Every player gets a starting stack and a rebuy chip as a part of their entry fee. You can redeem the rebuy chip any time (between hands) you want for free for a starting stack. Your current stack does not matter. I think this actually adds a lot of strategy to the rebuy process and I’m always for that. People use it as all-in protection or to be more aggressive and start with a bigger stack. This way, each player can kind of customize their rebuy to their playing style. (NOTE: At the end of the rebuy period, you must turn it in for your second stack of chips.)

I've been running my tournaments with a pre-paid rebuy for about a year now BUT you have to bust out to use it (or reach the end of the rebuy period and it becomes and addon).

I was thinking of doing a double prepaid rebuy st my next game but allow people to use them at any time during the rebuy period.

Has anyone tried something like this before?

Thanks
Grant

 

[BGinGA]

I've been running my tournaments with a pre-paid rebuy for about a year now BUT you have to bust out to use it (or reach the end of the rebuy period and it becomes and addon).

I was thinking of doing a double prepaid rebuy st my next game but allow people to use them at any time during the rebuy period.

Has anyone tried something like this before?

Thanks
Grant

Sorta.

30k stacks, getting 10k in chips up front with two 10k markers that be redeemed (independently) any time between hands for another 10k in chips. Not required to be busted, and markers are automatically redeemed at the end of the re-buy period (yes, full 30k re-buys are available for those who bust out, but it's rare).

Ran it for a couple of years before cutting stacks back to 20k (10k in chips and a single 10k marker). The latter seems to work better. About 25% of the field starts with the full 20k.