Tourney Rebuy / add-on chip variations (2 Viewers)

[upNdown]

I know @BGinGA talks about using a rebuy chip and if it isn't used for a rebuy by a certain point, it can be used as an add-on. I'd like to hear the specifics of how that works, Dave, and anybody else who does something similar - what's the initial buy-in and for how many chips, and then, how much does it cost to add-on and how many chips do you get for that?

But here's another idea that just raced across my mind - tell me if it's insane. You could use the chip like that - as a rebuy, or as an add-on if you still have it at that point. But suppose if using it as an add-on gave you a decent amount of chips - it's a good value, almost a no-brainer. But suppose, if you didn't use it as an add-on, it could revert to being used as a re-buy. But if it was used as a late-tournament re-buy, instead of it giving you a specific number of chips, it gave you a fixed amount of big blinds, something like 4 or 5bb?
So if you didn't use it as a rebuy early on for a new full stack, and you didn't use it as a valuable mid-tournament add-on, you could save it and use it as a life preserver at the final table? I'm not sure how much it should cost you to use it as a late-tourrnament life-preserver, but I feel like if you got the costs and values right, it could be an interesting variable.
Anybody ever try anything like this?

 

[justsomedude]

So if you didn't use it as a rebuy early on for a new full stack, and you didn't use it as a valuable mid-tournament add-on, you could save it and use it as a life preserver at the final table?

Once I get past 5-6 handed, I start thinking about chopping and how to go home. If the host instituted a late re-buy option that made the game run another 30-45 minutes longer... I might punch them square in the face.

 

[upNdown]

Once I get past 5-6 handed, I start thinking about chopping and how to go home. If the host instituted a late re-buy option that made the game run another 30-45 minutes longer... I might punch them square in the face.

That’s an obvious objection to it, but my thinking is that if it’s an attractive enough option as an early rebuy or add-on, most people would use their chip that way, so it wouldn’t be very often that it’s used late in the game.
Or itmight be a terrible idea, I dunno.

 

[v1pe]

Interested to hear answers to your original question.

I don't like the idea much of a "late rebuy", that's my initial reaction anyway.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Put actual numbers to your idea, and I'll tell you what I think of it. As a theoretical amount in a hypothetical game with a questionable amounts of blinds you are asking more focus from my brain than a potentially bad idea is worth.

 

[TexRex]

They way I've seen this done is the re-buy chip can be used prior to the time the tournament entry cut-off occurs. If it isn't used to re-buy, then it can be an add-on. I'm not a fan of that system, but it does seem to work.

Buying in and getting 4-5 BB at any point is crazy. I've seen some re-buy for 10 BB, and that is just nuts too. Part of me is happy to allow it though. Their money goes in the pot and their chances of winning pretty much go in the pot too. There is an exception. I played in a game where they allowed unlimited re-buys. They were paying 3 places. One night I lost a big hand with 4 players and got KO'd. Normally I wouldn't even consider a re-buy for 10 BB, but that night I would be the last to act and 2 hands before I was BB. The chip leader was in the UTG. The guy with 5 BB was BB, while the SB had about 15 BB. Third would make me a little money, so I reasoned that the guy with 5 BB, who was about to be the BB, would basically have to go all in or be down to 2 BB if he didn't win before I had to act. So I was trying to buy 3rd place. The two short stacks both went out the next hand -- I wound up 2nd!

In another game, something similar happened, but that time I'd have to the BB and then SB before the guy with a smaller stack than I had would have to put chips in (he was about to be the dealer). I didn't re-buy that time.

Personally, I think that's a bad system and would prefer to either limit re-buys, or if they allow unlimited re-buys, cut off the re-buy time. We cut off entries at 17.5 BB; I personally would not buy in if there were less than 50 BB, at least most of the time. Re-buys could be different because you've been in the game and see how it flows.

I've never seen it used to buy a certain number of BB, but instead it's a set amount in chips. What I'd prefer -- double your starting stack and do a freeze-out. If the cut-off time is at least 50 BB, then I'm fine with the add-on. Otherwise I do it because it doesn't make sense not to, but I don't like those structures.

 

[BGinGA]

I know @BGinGA talks about using a rebuy chip and if it isn't used for a rebuy by a certain point, it can be used as an add-on. I'd like to hear the specifics of how that works, Dave, and anybody else who does something similar - what's the initial buy-in and for how many chips, and then, how much does it cost to add-on and how many chips do you get for that?

I have done it several ways, but the current season for the ASoP league uses these parameters:

• Initial $60 entry purchases T20000 chips and a re-buy chip
• If busted during the first 8 levels (2 hours), a player can redeem the re-buy chip (another T20000 chips for $60).
• At the end of the re-buy period, players exchange unused re-buy chips for a free T5000 add-on.
• An optional T10000 add-on for $30 (half-stack for half-price) is also available for purchase at the end of the re-buy period.

The current CPT league uses these parameters:

• Initial $40 entry purchases T10000 chips and a re-buy chip
• If busted during the first 6 levels (2 hours), a player can redeem the re-buy chip (another T10000 chips for $60).
• At the end of the re-buy period, players exchange unused re-buy chips for a free T2000 add-on.
• An optional T5000 add-on for $10 (half-stack for quarter-price) is also available for purchase at the end of the re-buy period.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that the re-buy chip has intrinsic value.

For players that use it when busted, it's a way to remain in the event when lady luck isn't shining your way. For those that don't use it to re-buy, it still has value in terms of additional add-on chips. I've found that a) limiting re-buys to just one per player, and b) assigning a finite add-on value to unused re-buy chips helps make most players who prefer no re-buys really warm up to the idea.

It's really the best of both worlds -- players who rarely bust early get rewarded, and players who suffer early bad beats aren't shut out.

 

[Emlemleml]

I have done it several ways, but the current season for the ASoP league uses these parameters:

• Initial $60 entry purchases T20000 chips and a re-buy chip
• If busted during the first 8 levels (2 hours), a player can redeem the re-buy chip (another T20000 chips for $60).
• At the end of the re-buy period, players exchange unused re-buy chips for a free T5000 add-on.
• An optional T10000 add-on for $30 (half-stack for half-price) is also available for purchase at the end of the re-buy period.

The current CPT league uses these parameters:

• Initial $40 entry purchases T10000 chips and a re-buy chip
• If busted during the first 6 levels (2 hours), a player can redeem the re-buy chip (another T10000 chips for $60).
• At the end of the re-buy period, players exchange unused re-buy chips for a free T2000 add-on.
• An optional T5000 add-on for $10 (half-stack for quarter-price) is also available for purchase at the end of the re-buy period.

I'm a firm believer in the idea that the re-buy chip has intrinsic value.

For players that use it when busted, it's a way to remain in the event when lady luck isn't shining your way. For those that don't use it to re-buy, it still has value in terms of additional add-on chips. I've found that a) limiting re-buys to just one per player, and b) assigning a finite add-on value to unused re-buy chips helps make most players who prefer no re-buys really warm up to the idea.

It's really the best of both worlds -- players who rarely bust early get rewarded, and players who suffer early bad beats aren't shut out.

If I get this right, the re-buy chip you use is practically just there to say that,
"hey, you are able to put some more money in the pot, this one more time"?
So basically its just a reminder to the people that you are allowed to re-buy 1 time, and this is not a freeze out.
On the other hand, it is limited to 1 re-buy only?




Anyways.. another way I've been using a "re-buy chip" or two in my games.

A little info about the tournament we played before the use of it.
Buy-in for 200,
up to 2 re-buys or 1 add-on for 200 each.
So everyone was limited for the use of max 600 each.
For the buy-in, the re-buys and the add-on you recieved T15,000 for the 200 you payed with.
This was allowed the first 90-120 mins of the tourney.
Obviously not everyone used this opportunity to put in the 400 extra per player.


The change of the game was, and btw, we did this about 5 times, so it's not tested alot, but the idea is as follows.

Now everyone had to buy-in for say, 500.
Everybody recieved a start stack of T15,000 + 2 life-chips with a value of T15,000 each.

• If you bust your 15k stack, you can use 1 life-chip for another 15k.
• If you bust again you can use the last life-chip for another 15k.
• If you have 1 life-chip left when the 120mins has passed. This converts into another 15k into your stack.
• If you have 2 life-chips left when the 120mins has passed. This converts into 30k into your stack.
• If you want to, you can actually use all the chips at once, so you could have a start stack of T45,000 not many of us did this.

In other words. Everybody kinda starts with T45,000.

What we accomplished with this was that:

• Everybody averaged more money into the prizepool. So the prizepool got bigger.
• And it was easier to control the Total time of the tournament. Because you knew the total chips in play when you started the game.

I hope I wasn't completely off target of the original post

 

[T_Chan]

There is an exception. I played in a game where they allowed unlimited re-buys. They were paying 3 places. One night I lost a big hand with 4 players and got KO'd. Normally I wouldn't even consider a re-buy for 10 BB, but that night I would be the last to act and 2 hands before I was BB. The chip leader was in the UTG. The guy with 5 BB was BB, while the SB had about 15 BB. Third would make me a little money, so I reasoned that the guy with 5 BB, who was about to be the BB, would basically have to go all in or be down to 2 BB if he didn't win before I had to act. So I was trying to buy 3rd place. The two short stacks both went out the next hand -- I wound up 2nd!

So when the next 2 players got knocked out, why wouldn't 4th place just rebuy to become the new 3rd place and cash? Which then makes the original 3rd place player the 4th place, but then they could rebuy to get back in to make it 4 handed again... When does it end?

Unlimited rebuys are something I've done, but with a time limit, usually about 2 hours into a 5 hour game.

I really don't like the idea of allowing a late rebuy for 4-5 BB's because at that point, you're coming back in with barely any chips compared to the rest of the players and would have to essentially push all in any hand and hope to get lucky. That takes most of the skill out of the game. If I was mid-stack down to 5-6 players and someone rebought to get 5 BB's, then doubled up twice with horrible hands but got lucky, then I got knocked out I would not be too happy.

With 8-12 BB's, you can still claw your way back in with strategic play and even folding a couple of blinds, but not with <5.

 

[TexRex]

Great question, T Chan. One guy ran out of money. Even if the other guy hadn't run out of money, he had re-bought 4-5 times already. He'd reached the point where only winning 1st would let him help him.

The other did buy back in. I was BB, he was SB. Other player called the BB, then SB went all in. I called, but I had a stronger hand. He wasn't willing to buy back in because the blinds were doubling, and I'd still have more than 2x his stack.

I never saw anyone re-buy when they got less than 10 BB. My personal view was to not re-buy more than 1x because of the possibility that you might buy in for another $20, but could not win that much back. Their rules would have allowed them to re-buy, but at some point, even they weren't crazy enough.

 

[bsdunbar1]

I know this thread is old but I'm thinking about adding an add-on to our weekly league game and would like some opinions on my thoughts from you guys who have experience doing them.
I like @BGinGA ideas about the re-buy chip having intrinsic value but I want to use the add-on in a different way.
Let me throw out a little info on what we do now.

Usually 16-22 players per week + avg of 4 rebuys per wk
$7000 starting stacks
25/50 starting blinds
20min blinds
Rebuys for the first 3 levels
Our weekly tourney usually lasts ~3.5hrs
We play for $25 per week with $20 going towards the weekly prizepool & $5 going to the end of season freeroll
Rebuys are $25 with the same $20/$5 split as above and you get $6000 in chips
Our seasons are 15 or 20 weeks, our season ending freeroll is next week and we have $1800 up for grabs with 4 of the 8 getting paid so it adds up to a few pennies.

This next season we will be starting I am toying with the idea of having an option for an add-on for $10 at the end of the re-buy period. The entire $10 would go towards the freeroll and you would get $XX in chips.

The add-on is optional and using Dr Neau's scoring system it would detract from your collected points because your expense for the tourney went up when you buy the add-on, so you would have to weigh in that option to your decision. I like the added level of strategy this brings.

Does this make sense?
If it does make sense what would be the recommended amount of chips for the add-on?
What downfall do you see to this and/or what about it doesn't make any sense?

 

[bsdunbar1]

Bueller...... Bueller.....

 

[upNdown]

I know this thread is old but I'm thinking about adding an add-on to our weekly league game and would like some opinions on my thoughts from you guys who have experience doing them.
I like @BGinGA ideas about the re-buy chip having intrinsic value but I want to use the add-on in a different way.
Let me throw out a little info on what we do now.

Usually 16-22 players per week + avg of 4 rebuys per wk
$7000 starting stacks
25/50 starting blinds
20min blinds
Rebuys for the first 3 levels
Our weekly tourney usually lasts ~3.5hrs
We play for $25 per week with $20 going towards the weekly prizepool & $5 going to the end of season freeroll
Rebuys are $25 with the same $20/$5 split as above and you get $6000 in chips
Our seasons are 15 or 20 weeks, our season ending freeroll is next week and we have $1800 up for grabs with 4 of the 8 getting paid so it adds up to a few pennies.

This next season we will be starting I am toying with the idea of having an option for an add-on for $10 at the end of the re-buy period. The entire $10 would go towards the freeroll and you would get $XX in chips.

The add-on is optional and using Dr Neau's scoring system it would detract from your collected points because your expense for the tourney went up when you buy the add-on, so you would have to weigh in that option to your decision. I like the added level of strategy this brings.

Does this make sense?
If it does make sense what would be the recommended amount of chips for the add-on?
What downfall do you see to this and/or what about it doesn't make any sense?

No answers here, but some questions might help get the balll rolling.

Why is your current rebuy for 6,000 chips when it costs the same as the 7,000 buyin? The chips are already worth less if you’re in level 2 or 3 - why make it a worse value by giving less? Are you trying to discourage rebuys?

You say you have an average of four rebuys per week - is that the average number of people who crap out in the first few levels? Or are there people crapping out early who aren’t rebuying?

What are you trying to do with whatever changes you’re looking to make? Are you trying to get more money into the weekly prize pool and/or the year-end prize pool? Are you trying to add a competitive twist? Are you just suggesting change to keep things interesting?

 

[bsdunbar1]

No answers here, but some questions might help get the balll rolling.

Why is your current rebuy for 6,000 chips when it costs the same as the 7,000 buyin? The chips are already worth less if you’re in level 2 or 3 - why make it a worse value by giving less? Are you trying to discourage rebuys? Somewhat yes. We implemented the rebuys as a way to build the end of year freeroll pot. The rebuys definitely changed the mentality and the play weekly. Guys were basically using the rebuys as a way to be loose aggressive and would shove to either chip up or rebuy right before the cut off. You would have 92 off going over the top of AK suited just to double up or rebuy. I know this is the nature of the beast with rebuys, but the top points earners for the season are also the guys with the most rebuys.

You say you have an average of four rebuys per week - is that the average number of people who crap out in the first few levels? Or are there people crapping out early who aren’t rebuying? Most guys rebuy but there were a few that do not rebuy no matter what. We have had as many as 7 rebuys in the first hour with 17 players.

What are you trying to do with whatever changes you’re looking to make? Are you trying to get more money into the weekly prize pool and/or the year-end prize pool? Yes, the year end freeroll. By adding the add-on I can still collect the extra $$ the rebuys generated without changing the play so much - maybe.
Are you trying to add a competitive twist? Yes, I think adding a rebuy adds another element to the Dr Neau scoring system (which we did not use last season)
Are you just suggesting change to keep things interesting? Somewhat.

By adding an add-on, i think, it would add another level to the scoring system between shoving with 94 when you have 3500 left vs just adding on, which wouldn't add to your expenses as much therefore netting you more points in the scoring system.

What I am really looking for are some suggestions on what % of a 7k starting stack is appropriate for an add-on for $5 or $10? ($25 original entry)

 

[BGinGA]

A few thoughts....

• Not a fan of the reduced-stack re-buy (unless also reduced-price). Would probably never re-buy in such a structure, as it's really -EV.
• Adding intrinsic value to the re-buy chip/option helps prevent that 92vsAK shove mentality. The free add-on for unused re-buy option works.
• I generally structure a paid add-on to be worth between 1/2 of original entry (for 1/2 stack) and 1/4 of original entry (for 1/4 stack), pending ease of math.

If sticking with your existing $25 entry for T7000, I'd restructure the $25 re-buy to be worth T7000, offer a $10 add-on for T3000, and add a free T1500 add-on for unused re-buys. Adding the free add-on while maintaining the shorter-stack re-buy really makes those re-buys look unattractive, which may not result in enough extra $$ going to the year-end prize pool (what's the real goal here?).


Our league penalizes for re-buys and add-ons, and rewards bounty knock-outs and appearances..... but none of those directly changes the awarded points, which remain highly skill-based (vs appearance-based). Instead, those four items are used (along with points earned during the season) when calculating the starting stacks for the year-end event. If those items (re-buys, add-ons) were used to directly affect the points, I'd want the effect to be minimal.

 

[v1pe]

A few thoughts....

• Not a fan of the reduced-stack re-buy (unless also reduced-price). Would probably never re-buy in such a structure, as it's really -EV.
• Adding intrinsic value to the re-buy chip/option helps prevent that 92vsAK shove mentality. The free add-on for unused re-buy option works.
• I generally structure a paid add-on to be worth between 1/2 of original entry (for 1/2 stack) and 1/4 of original entry (for 1/4 stack), pending ease of math.

If sticking with your existing $25 entry for T7000, I'd restructure the $25 re-buy to be worth T7000, offer a $10 add-on for T3000, and add a free T1500 add-on for unused re-buys. Adding the free add-on while maintaining the shorter-stack re-buy really makes those re-buys look unattractive, which may not result in enough extra $$ going to the year-end prize pool (what's the real goal here?).


Our league penalizes for re-buys and add-ons, and rewards bounty knock-outs and appearances..... but none of those directly changes the awarded points, which remain highly skill-based (vs appearance-based). Instead, those four items are used (along with points earned during the season) when calculating the starting stacks for the year-end event. If those items (re-buys, add-ons) were used to directly affect the points, I'd want the effect to be minimal.

I wonder, have you ever posted your league points formula?

 

[bsdunbar1]

I wonder, have you ever posted your league points formula?

This season our points system was;
+1 for playing
+1 for each person you finished higher than
+1 for finishing in the $$
+1 for the win

The next season we start next week we will use Dr Neau's system. Which factors in the players total expense, which would be detrimental to re-buy or add-on.

offer a $10 add-on for T3000, and add a free T1500 add-on for unused re-buys.

I like this idea, it adds another level of complexity to think about. It gives me an avenue to fatten the freeroll pot, while also rewarding someone with the Free add-on.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I've never been a fan of point systems that award a different amount for each place eliminated - at least when a tournament spreads out to 2 or more tables. Just because you lasted longer with a chattier/slower dealing table does not make you the better player.

If the goal in poker is to finish in the money with an emphasis to finish high in the money, shouldn't the points also support the same goal?

 

[bsdunbar1]

If the goal in poker is to finish in the money with an emphasis to finish high in the money, shouldn't the points also support the same goal?

I agree, that is why we give an additional point for getting into the money plus an additional point for winning.

Here is what is listed about Dr Neau's system.
It was really easy to be the first one eliminated. Just about as easy to be the second one out … or the third one out … or fourth. But each position got a little bit harder. And when you got close to the money, a lot harder. And as the awards for each additional finish went up, it got even harder…and the difficulty didn't increase linearly…it increased exponentially. The points for finishing position within a tournament should follow a nice accelerating curve.

 

[BGinGA]

If the goal in poker is to finish in the money with an emphasis to finish high in the money, shouldn't the points also support the same goal?

Totally agree, for serious players. For recreational players, the arguments for rewarding consistency and attendance are also well-founded, as it tends to give the lesser-skilled players a better chance of scoring.

Here is what is listed about Dr Neau's system.
It was really easy to be the first one eliminated. Just about as easy to be the second one out … or the third one out … or fourth. But each position got a little bit harder. And when you got close to the money, a lot harder. And as the awards for each additional finish went up, it got even harder…and the difficulty didn't increase linearly…it increased exponentially. The points for finishing position within a tournament should follow a nice accelerating curve.

I've never been a fan of point systems that award a different amount for each place eliminated - at least when a tournament spreads out to 2 or more tables. Just because you lasted longer with a chattier/slower dealing table does not make you the better player.

Again, I totally agree. An accelerating curve helps reward performance, but it still makes an artificial "difference" between very small increments of 'performance'. I prefer to group those into larger segments that are each awarded similar points (so still a curve, but with larger intervals between jumps). In other words, using an accelerated curve is a step in the right direction, but it's not a perfect solution, either.

I also believe that it takes quite a bit of skill to reach the final 3 of any event, but luck often plays a very large role in determining the actual final finishing order of those three. For that reason, I tend to favor both point and payout systems that use a curve, but one that flattens a bit when it gets to the top. Winning should be rewarded, but the top finisher typically isn't twice as good as second place, and the points (or payout) awarded should more accurately reflect that luck factor than what is done with most point/payout systems.