Add-On Good or Bad
I am going to be playing in the Rock's tourney on Wednesday, with a Buy-in of $40 Re-Buy of $20 and a Add on of $40 No-limit. Unlimited rebuys for first hour then $40 add-on after that for originall amount of chips 1000. Should the add-on be automatic or should it depend on my stack size in relation to everyone else. If I'm down then yes but how much do I have to be up to say No. All suggetions are wanted please. Thanks
Comments
This is what I think about before deciding on adding-on or not.
The casino probably requires that you decide on the 1st add-on before play starts. So that is a tough one.
How is the blind structure (slow or agressive).
How do you play during the re-buy stage. Agressive with anything thats suited or connected. Or do play it like a freeze out. Top ten hand only unless in the Small/Big Blind.
If you are running cold and don't pay any hands what is you stack going to look like after 30 minutes, based on the blind structure will you be well below average or just slightly below.
Has everyone else at your table taken the add-on (this is a tough one if you have to purchase before play begins).
As for the second add-on I base it on the average chip stacks at that time of the tournament. How far am I above or below.
During re-buys tourneys I always plan how much I am willing to spend and spend no more than what I have planned. So if I spend all my money during the re-buy stage I don't take the add-on.
Just some things to think about.
There was a guy who used to post here by the name of MiamiKeith, I believe. He stopped posting here because, as I recall, he couldn't stand the new 'interface'... V-bulletin. Regardless, I got the impression that he knew what he was talking about. A similar question was asked on this forum quite a while ago: is it a good idea to take the immediate rebuy, if there is one? His answer was succinct: if you believe you're one of the best players in the tournament, then yes. You will know (moreso than the next guy) what to do with those chips, so it must be +EV for you to purchase chips every time you get the chance.
That's a pretty tough call to make though. I've played a lot of tournaments, and I can't imagine getting to the point where I could honestly, objectively say that I am guaranteed to be in the top 5% of players in terms of skill. There are people who have been playing for way longer than me, who can probably read me like a book. So, there must be another way to determine whether or not to take an add-on, when the opportunity arises.
Like you said, if you have a short stack (but not so short that even after adding on it would still be a crapshoot) then you take the add-on. If you're average, same thing... the average will go up as everyone takes the add-on, and you want to be keeping up with the Joneses. Above average by a bit, I'd still take it. Above average by a lot, then it's time to look at the blinds. If they are going to be 100/200 after the add-on (for example) and you have 10,000, then I don't see much point in adding another 2000. Let's face it, there's still a lot of play left in the tournament for you, and at 100/200, the difference between 10,000 and 12,000 is practically nil. The more chips you have, the less each individual chip is 'worth', so you'd be paying cash out of your pocket for chips that would be--in that scenario--almost worthless.
At 6,000 I'd probably take the 2,000 add-on. I'm not sure exactly what the criteria is, for me or for anyone. I guess it's mostly based on a sense of where my stack is at relative to the majority of players left in the tournament, and whether or not I'm getting good value for my dollar. The more chips I have, the less valuable they are, so a point is reached where taking the add-on is kind of redundant. Unfortunately, I'm not able to pinpoint exactly when that point is reached. I suspect that if you think that taking an add-on might be redundant, then it probably is.
Regards,
all_aces
I've been thinking a lot about this (e.g. because of the $11+R Stars tourneys).
It is not obvious to me that it's +EV for *anyone* to take an immediate re-buy. Obviously the EV of a re-buy is higher for better players relative to poor players, but it is still not necessarily positive.
Think of it this way. Say you're in an $11+R tourney with inital stack 1,500 and you're the best poker player in the world. Would you accept the fact that a $10 re-buy for *one* tournament chip is going to be a -EV play? Good.*
Now, what if the re-buy was for T1,000,000 chips instead (still costing $10)? Dare I suggest that the re-buy would be +EV in this case? C'mon, you know it would.
So... (you know what's coming)
There must be some point between T1 chips and T1,000,000 chips where decision to immediately re-buy, for the best poker player in the world, goes from -EV to +EV. (You can repeat the exercise for a poker player of your own skill level.**)
The key question is: Do you know what that point is?
I sure don't.
And it would be a heck of a coincidence if it was actually the standard re-buy amount of T1,500, don't you think?
This EV cutoff point is also going to be different for players of different skill levels. It would be more remarkable still if the EV cutoff for the *average* player of every single re-buy tournament out there turns out to be exactly T1,500.
This is a very complicated question I think, much moreso than it appears to be at first glance. Saying you should immediately re-buy if you're "one of the best players" is not only not necessarily true (as in the extreme T1 chip re-buy case), but doesn't even begin to answer the question we're really trying to get at. You need to tell us what it means exactly to be "one of the best players".
Unfortunately, the question of what the EV cutoff point is for when to take the add-on ain't gettin' any easier, y'all. It's basically the same ball of grease.
ScottyZ
*In case it's not clear, I'm looking at the act of re-buying *alone* in terms of the EV. The best player in the world might take a T1 chip re-buy (which is -EV) and *still* be +EV overall in the tournament. For example, his EV might go from +$30.00 to +$20.01 after the $10 re-buy. This makes the EV of the re-buy negative, namely -$9.99 in this example.
**If necessary.
Good question, Munchkin5.
Regards,
all_aces
And what post were you reading?
That's certainly definitive, but I don't know if you want to call it an answer.
All_aces, my thinking was that you have covered a good deal of the useful practical advice about re-buy/add-ons in your post. So I felt I could go theoretical on this thread's ass.
However, I think both you and I (and others) have established some important and hopefully useful facts and/or tips here.
1. A more skilled player should be inclined to re-buy more* than a little skilled player. (Does this tell you something about a player who "hates re-buy tournaments"?) How skilled you have to be relative to the field to make re-buying +EV is a difficult question.
*I do not mean more often. I mean the more skilled player would be more willing (i.e. have higher EV) to re-buy than a lower skilled payer in the identical situation.
2. There is some point (as measured in tournament chips) for each individual player where re-buying becomes +EV. This is not very practical since this point is difficult to compute.
3. For add-ons, there is probably a point where you have too many chips for adding-on to be a good choice (or if you like, +EV). I might suggest as a very rough rule of thumb (pretty much in agreement with All_aces' example) that when you have a stack which is 5 or 6 times the add-on amount, you might begin to consider not adding-on.
4. The blind structure in the rounds following the add-on is a *very* important consideration.
5. There may even be a point where your stack is too small relative to the blinds to make the add-on useful, but this doesn't seem to be as likely a concern as in #3 where your stack being too big.
6. Your skill level being too low relative to the field may also cause you to reconsider re-buying or adding-on, *regardless* of your stack size. There is certainly no shame in this. I once did not take an add-on with a smallish stack in a tournament at the Mirage because I felt I was severely out-classed at the time. The fact that pretty much everyone at my table suggested that I take the add-on makes me feel that I made the right choice by not taking it.
Any more items for the list? I love lists.
ScottyZ
It could be that a $10 re-buy increases your overall tournament expected gross win by +$2. This would be a very bad use of $10.
As you correctly point out here, re-buying *clearly* increases your overall tournament expected gross win by some amount by giving you more tournament chips while others get none. But the real question is: Is the monetary advantage (in terms of your expected gross win) you gain in the tournament worth more or less than the monetary re-buy amount?
ScottyZ
I will look at my stack after first hour, if 6-7 times bigger then add on I will probably pass. Anything under that then will most likely go for it. Blinds are 100-200 after first hour. Will let you know how I finished. Thanks For the help. Munchkin5
I might take the add-on in this case. It depends. Remember, I said "begin to consider". Maybe I should have instead said something like I would be very likely to add-on if below 5*add-on. Maybe 10*add-on is a reasonable limit for when to not take it. Between the two is the dreaded IDZ. (It Depends Zone^TM)
Note: there may be a strange blind structure where I would not add-on (basically giving up) if my stack was very small, the add-on was very small and $-expensive, and the blinds were very big.
Some things it depends on:
1. What's the average stack? (can be *very* hard to compute in B&M tourneys unless they have a computer keeping track of the re-buy information)
2. What are the blinds like?
3. How skilled am I compared to the field?
4. How much $ is the add-on?
ScottyZ
Yikes...given that I *hate* re-buy tournaments, the relevant question is now - what does this tell you about NurseHoliday's skill level?? :mad:
However, in my defense (and to sidetrack the thread a little bit) I would suggest that there are 2 related reasons I hate rebuy tournaments. The first is strictly a bankroll issue - my bankroll is limited and thus any rebuy tournament necessitates risking a larger portion of my balance which obviously heightens the risk of introducing myself to Mr. Gambler S. Ruin. It exacerbates the volatility of the swings in other words. The 2nd related reason I hate these tourneys is that they swing the advantage (maybe not on a strictly EV basis) in favour of Daddy Warbucks. For Donald Trump to sit at the same $10 + Rebuy tourney as me is not good, especially if he brings several friends (a cash game would be different - I would LOVE them to join me here). Even if they all suck at poker, they are taking several cracks at the cat and sooner or later one of them will likely stumble into something real good - the 10000 monkeys on the typewriter scenario. This puts me at a disadvantage with my limited resources....in my mind it is like pocket AA vs 8 callers...I may be the BEST, but I will likely not win.
A freezeout tourny in my mind is the great equalizer - it levels the playing field so that now I relish the DONALD sitting at my table - a freezeout tourny without a doubt (I'm quite certain scottyz will point something out that forces me to revise my thinking
Maybe it depends on why you play tourneys...is it to win money, or is it to win the tourney itself (not necessarily the same thing).
I know there are many variables, but I think you get my drift. If I don't want to spend more than--for example--$500 on a tournament, then I won't play in a $300 rebuy tournament... I'll wait until a $500 freezeout comes along, or a $100 or $200 rebuy tournament. Similarly, although a $10+1 rebuy tournament may be a little too pricey for you, would you be adverse to playing in a $3 rebuy?
Cheers,
all_aces
Thanks AA. You raise a good point - one that I had intended to make but forgot - if you are of limited bankroll, you need to look at tourneys with lower buyins so that you still feel comfortable with the total cash outlay. The only rub with this is that there don't seem to be too many of the lower-buy-in variety (please correct me if I am wrong and direct me to the appropriate sites). I have only registered at pokerstars, and there don't seem to be a lot of $3 + rebuy tourneys (maybe I'm looking at the wrong times??).
And I agree with your approach in terms of looking at a $10 + 1 rebuy as the same as a $30 + 1 freezeout - plan to spend $30 (buy-in + rebuy/addons) and no more..if you spend less than it is gravy. Having said that, my philosophical aversion to rebuy tourneys remains - I would FAR RATHER play in a $30 freezeout than a $10 + 1 rebuy tourney - but that is just me and it might well be that I am doing precisely the WRONG thing here. Maybe my EV would be higher if I changed teams and played only rebuys??? I'm open to the discussion, but suspect I'll be hard to persuade.
An interesting tangent - if it is true that the BEST players benefit from rebuying, than perhaps the WSOP Main Event would be well served by going to a rebuy format - improving the PRO's chances of winning and reducing the likelihood of a no-name winning. Plus, the PRO likely has more $ (his own or via backers) so it would tilt the field in his favour, no? BTW I would HATE for them to do this - I like the fact that a Moneymaker can win it all - but I throw it out there for discussion.
I, for one, do not plan on taking responsibility for your decision to 'change teams' in any way...
I'm going to have to think about that. My immediate reaction is that it's a GREAT idea. The WSOP main event is becoming more and more of a crapshoot (IMHO) so they need to find a way to narrow the field. Making it a 10K *rebuy* tournament would be one way to do that. The idea isn't (or at least, shouldn't be) to 'reward the rich'. In my mind, (my somewhat naiive, idealistic, shangri-la kind of mind) people play in the WSOP because they are poker players who have worked all year to build their poker bankrolls to the point where they can afford to play in it. It's kind of a 'poker reward' for winning players, which means it'll be a tough field, a real challenge, the best of the best, etcetera... Lately, these massive fields have made me think: crapshoot, crapshoot, crapshoot. Not entirely a crapshoot mind you, but more so than I'd like it to be.
I say increase the price of admission to the point where not every guy who makes a decent living can watch it on TV, go to the Horseshoe, and drop 10K for kicks. This is supposed to be some kind of elite event. There are plenty of other tournaments that these wanna-be's can play in.
Then there's another part of me that says: hell, it should be accessible to every Tom Dick and Harry who wants to play. Anyone can win! That's the beauty of it!
As you can see, I'm conflicted, and it's partially your fault NH.
Regards,
all_aces
You'll do much better in the long run if you don't have an excuse for poor performance. If you *hate* re-buy tournaments, you're more likely to bust out of a re-buy tournament and say "I hate re-buy tournaments and I lost because everyone was being stupid with re-buys" instead of "maybe I played hand X wrong, and I can learn something from it".
As All_aces mentioned already in terms of bankroll, *assume* you are going to take 2 or 3 re-buys and the add-on. You're entering a $41 or $51 tournament when the fee is listed as $11+R. Count on the fact that Casino Regina re-buy tournaments will set you back in the neigborhood of $400-$800 each.
Here are a few nice things about the $11+R tourneys at Stars (for example).
1. You occasionally get to be at the same table as a wacko with a lot of dough who thinks it's fun to go all-in 10 hands in a row, and make 10 re-buys. (Happened to me last $11+R.) Believe it or not, players with a large amount of money who don't play well don't stand a chance of beating re-buy tournaments in the long run. They simply pay too high of an entry fee (in total) each tournament. Having loads of cash actually puts them at an incredible disadvantage if they can't use that cash skillfully.
2. Bad players have more decisions to make (e.g., do I re-buy or not?) and are apt to play either too loose or too tight during the re-buy period. (Too loose is much more common.)
3. Bad players can bust out and remain in the tournament during the re-buy period. This one is huge.
4. Good players can take more chances in the re-buy period. It's a strange phenomenon. Bad players generally play to loosely and it hurts them. Good players can play more loosely and turn loose play into an advantage.
5. A tournament with a $30,000-$40,000 prize pool, and a $1 house drop? Sign me up please.
An average-skilled player who uses a sound re-buy strategy will be transformed from a -EV player (because of the house drop) to a +EV nearly automatically if enough of the field is simply re-buying incorrectly.
ScottyZ
A multi-day poker tournament with the slowest moving blind structure in the world is a crapshoot?
?
My opinion on the "anyone can win" phenomemon is that there isn't nearly as large of a skill gap as most people think between the best professional B&M players, the best amateur B&M players, the best online professional players, and the best online amateur players.
It's not so much "anyone can win", but more like "someone I've never heard of can win". It might be natural to equate "someone I've never heard of" with "some bad player who just got lucky".
Poker has undergone severe globalization. It's not like 12 geezers from Texas are the only good poker players in the world any more. That was like sooooo 2001.
ScottyZ