your just seeing the short term its the long term whats the damage i used to recollect the uk scene used to be bouncing with 500 and 1k events every week then rentries come along boom game over
there was once a poker site thriving with 100's of tables listened to players got rid of 20bb buyin made it 30 n 40 min what happened its pratically deserted on cash and if you want over 1-2 even worse ok for tours to a degree but cash is dead now
What you posted is gibberish to me. The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not. This has worked well since it was adopted in the main. I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini. Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
your just seeing the short term its the long term whats the damage i used to recollect the uk scene used to be bouncing with 500 and 1k events every week then rentries come along boom game over
there was once a poker site thriving with 100's of tables listened to players got rid of 20bb buyin made it 30 n 40 min what happened its pratically deserted on cash and if you want over 1-2 even worse ok for tours to a degree but cash is dead now
What you posted is gibberish to me. The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not. This has worked well since it was adopted in the main. I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini. Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
On Sunday it is a £10 buy in.
point is Meddling just destroys what is good in first place hows that for plain terms rather than Gibberish as you call it
there was once a poker site thriving with 100's of tables listened to players got rid of 20bb buyin made it 30 n 40 min what happened its pratically deserted on cash and if you want over 1-2 even worse ok for tours to a degree but cash is dead now
What you posted is gibberish to me. The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not. This has worked well since it was adopted in the main. I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini. Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
On Sunday it is a £10 buy in.
point is Meddling just destroys what is good in first place hows that for plain terms rather than Gibberish as you call it
My last post on this.
Sky introduced exactly the same thing to the main some time ago.
This has helped them to maintain the guarantees since they did it.
Nobody likes to see guarantees being reduced.
There were a couple of moans at the start, but quickly subsided.
The mini like the main runs every night.
On Sunday the buy in is £11.
On Friday it is a £5 rebuy.
Friday got 43 more runners than Thursday
Last night every player spent on average £11, and the prize pool was just about 5k
Every other night it is a £5 buy in and a 2k guarantee.
If I was purely considering myself, I would prefer to have a £11 buy in or a £5 rebuy every night, and play for double the money.
However I do appreciate that this might not suit other players.
So I merely suggested that allowing one re-entry may have a similar positive effect as the one it has had on the main.
Every player would then have the option of re-entering rather than finding another tourney to play, or not.
It would be for each player to make their own choice.
I cant see any downside to offering players the choice.
Isnt a player re-entering exactly the same to the existing players, as another player late entering?
Sky successfully meddled with the main to end up where we are today.
Personally, I would be in favour of having the option of 1 re-entry to the minis
I can only see the positive side of this. It obviously couldn't be compulsory. If you genuinely didn't have the money you couldn't. I don't see the difference between one player re-entering, or a different player late entering. Its the same boat. This seems to have worked well for the main.
Nothing wrong with bigger prize pools.
I'd agree...I rebuy in the mini I can afford to justify ...its academic for the main as I'd only play if I won a sat and certainly couldn't justify a rebuy cost whatever..the big boys can but
there was once a poker site thriving with 100's of tables listened to players got rid of 20bb buyin made it 30 n 40 min what happened its pratically deserted on cash and if you want over 1-2 even worse ok for tours to a degree but cash is dead now
What you posted is gibberish to me. The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not. This has worked well since it was adopted in the main. I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini. Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
On Sunday it is a £10 buy in.
@HAYSIE You are clearly not home with the downies, sorry down with the homies...whatever!
Introducing rebuys fundamentally benefits winning regs more than anyone else. These players will have the both the bankrolls needed to fire multiple bullets and, due their skill edge, the biggest incentive to rebuy. Therefore, the later stages of rebuy tournaments will have a greater proportion of good players remaining compared to a freezeout whereby weaker players only have to outlast the likes of MattBates et al just the one time.
Whether or not that is a good thing is obviously a matter of individual preference. Personally, I prefer the freezeout system whereby I feel I'll have a better chance of booking a win and am happy to make a trade-off against a slightly smaller prize pool for that opportunity. It could also be better for the ecology of the site as a whole if wins are being achieved by a more diverse group of players on average.
Finally, introducing a rebuy into the mini may lead Sky to reevaluate the final table jackpot promo as it'll undoubtedly lead to it being hit more often.
Also, one thing I'd really like to see is Sky adding a function to be be able to see in the lobby how many bullets a player has fired in an event thus far (most other sites do this now) so you know whether or not an opponent truly has their tournament life on the line in any given situation.
I play the mini tourneys quite often and would like the chance to re enter especially at weekends which I know is then only the Saturday evening as the Friday is already a rebuy.
When I pay during the week the fact it starts at 20:30 and I have to get up at 5.30 AM for work when I bust I don't mind because its bed time anyway. At the weekends I have more time to play and would like the chance to re enter when I bust early.
This is just my opinion and would not mind one re entry especially at the weekend not sure if people who work Mon-Fri 9 to 5 feel similar.
Introducing rebuys fundamentally benefits winning regs more than anyone else. These players will have the both the bankrolls needed to fire multiple bullets and, due their skill edge, the biggest incentive to rebuy. Therefore, the later stages of rebuy tournaments will have a greater proportion of good players remaining compared to a freezeout whereby weaker players only have to outlast the likes of MattBates et al just the one time.
Whether or not that is a good thing is obviously a matter of individual preference. Personally, I prefer the freezeout system whereby I feel I'll have a better chance of booking a win and am happy to make a trade-off against a slightly smaller prize pool for that opportunity. It could also be better for the ecology of the site as a whole if wins are being achieved by a more diverse group of players on average.
Finally, introducing a rebuy into the mini may lead Sky to reevaluate the final table jackpot promo as it'll undoubtedly lead to it being hit more often.
I understand your argument.
I have heard it before.
The same argument was put forward by those that were against a re-entry in the main.
I would agree that the argument sounds logical, but I am not sure if it is true.
I am not going to dispute it as I don't have access to the information that would prove it, or not.
I still cant see the difference between a good player busting out, and re-entering, or another good player late entering.
I have my doubts that many players scrutinise an mtt with 400 plus runners, to judge the strength of the field, before paying a fiver to enter.
The field can change dramatically when late entries are taken into account.
If your concerns are shared by many players, it would seem difficult to justify why the rebuy mini on Friday gets so many runners.
The argument for Bounty Hunters was that they spread the prize money further, which is a good thing.
Bigger prize pools surely attract more players.
While there are any number of tourneys with small buy ins, and not many runners.
As good as he is, Matt Bates didn't start winning the main every day when the re-entry was introduced.
there was once a poker site thriving with 100's of tables listened to players got rid of 20bb buyin made it 30 n 40 min what happened its pratically deserted on cash and if you want over 1-2 even worse ok for tours to a degree but cash is dead now
What you posted is gibberish to me. The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not. This has worked well since it was adopted in the main. I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini. Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
On Sunday it is a £10 buy in.
@HAYSIE You are clearly not home with the downies, sorry down with the homies...whatever!
Interesting debate as a mainly small bounty hunter player wouldn’t mind one rebuy but wouldn’t be keen on playing in a tournament that has multiple rebuys and addons even with the chance of extra winnings
I remember when the main introduced the single re-buy option I was a bit miffed initially as at the time I couldn't afford to use it however it in no way put me off playing as it was only a single re-buy.
Multiple re-buy and add on (Avengers, 5pm £11 etc...) are a different ball game, players who play these with no intention of re buying and or adding on are pretty much wasting there time in the long run. I always view these game types as if it were three times more than what the initial buy in is.
Introducing rebuys fundamentally benefits winning regs more than anyone else. These players will have the both the bankrolls needed to fire multiple bullets and, due their skill edge, the biggest incentive to rebuy. Therefore, the later stages of rebuy tournaments will have a greater proportion of good players remaining compared to a freezeout whereby weaker players only have to outlast the likes of MattBates et al just the one time.
Whether or not that is a good thing is obviously a matter of individual preference. Personally, I prefer the freezeout system whereby I feel I'll have a better chance of booking a win and am happy to make a trade-off against a slightly smaller prize pool for that opportunity. It could also be better for the ecology of the site as a whole if wins are being achieved by a more diverse group of players on average.
Finally, introducing a rebuy into the mini may lead Sky to reevaluate the final table jackpot promo as it'll undoubtedly lead to it being hit more often.
I wonder if anyone has actually looked at the percentage of players that re-enter, and actually cash, on average in a re-entry tourney.
For instance in the main last night there were 299 runners, 57 re-entries, and 30 got paid.
So only half those that re-entered could have cashed, if they filled the top 30 places.
The re-entries contributed £1700 to the prize pool.
It would be interesting to know how many of the 30 that got paid had re-entered.
If you knew how many of the 57 were regs, and how many of them cashed, then the argument might stand up.
To produce valid stats, you would have to check a few tourneys.
We have debated on a previous thread, the difference between rebuys, and re-entries.
Sky don't seem to differentiate, where other sites do.
On other sites where you must bust out before buying more chips is usually called a re-entry, because you have busted out and are effectively re-entering.
Whereas you can usually buy more chips at the start in a rebuy, and there is an add on.
I only make this point in respect of the fact that if a re-entry were allowed, then the final table bonus would be won more often.
This in my view would be a good thing.
I think you could justify charging a rake on a re-entry, which would probably cover the increased bonus payments.
To charge a 50pence rake on a £5 re-entry surely wouldn't make a difference to most people.
Whereas charging a rake on a Friday £20 rebuy would probably prompt lots of people to be reaching for their keyboards.
I think there is a real difference between a rebuy, and re-entry tournament. If you bust out, you are surely re-entering.
Why does the mini get the least entries on a Sunday?
Is it because of the £11 buy in, or perhaps because of the 7.30 bounty hunter?
It is difficult to think that it is the buy in, because the Friday rebuy is the busiest night, and players spend around £11 per head.
If it is because of the 7.30 tourney, then maybe the times could be adjusted to attract more entries.
It just seems strange that the least entries by far, happen to be on a Sunday.
I am fairly sure your Sunday answer is that people prefer bounty hunters. £11bh with re entries as part of Super Sundays etc where they had monster guarantees got loads of runners. Obviously the lure of a big special event increases numbers so that needs to be factored in.
I do think it is good to have one mini a week that is a freezeout though so I wouldn't like the Sunday mini to change to become a bh.
I am fairly sure your Sunday answer is that people prefer bounty hunters. £11bh with re entries as part of Super Sundays etc where they had monster guarantees got loads of runners. Obviously the lure of a big special event increases numbers so that needs to be factored in.
I do think it is good to have one mini a week that is a freezeout though so I wouldn't like the Sunday mini to change to become a bh.
On Sunday the mini is double the buy in compared to a normal night, and the same guarantee. So it is getting around half the entries. I wondered if this was caused by the increased buy in, which is a difficult claim if you compare it to Friday. Or perhaps the number of players that enter the £33 bounty hunter at 7.30. Why would the Sunday mini end up with the same guarantee as a normal night, despite double the buy in. I am not arguing that it should be a bounty hunter or not, although if that were the reason, how could you not argue to change it.
My 2 pence for what its worth, I particularly enjoy the no 2nd chance especially during the week, I don't have time to play a more drawn out tourney which it will lead to with more chips in play. There is also rebuys running concurrently alongside the minis so if you want to play a decent rebuy there is one out there. There however is not a lot of choice for another non rebuy tourney with a decent amount of runners that has a high payout. You cannot just cater for one type of player as the others will go elsewhere. Fridays Rebuys and add on gets more players I think mainly because it is a Friday people are off the next day so there are more players to play and they have time to sit and play and (enjoy) a game which myself and I assume many others through the week cant do. I play 2 tourneys through the week the 2.20 bh at 8pm and the mini. would I play both of these if they were rebuy or 1more chance probably not. then the only games I ould play would be a Monday triple take down and Fridays Orford one. I would find another site to play the type of games I like. So for me its a No, I know though different folks, have different strokes
My 2 pence for what its worth, I particularly enjoy the no 2nd chance especially during the week, I don't have time to play a more drawn out tourney which it will lead to with more chips in play. There is also rebuys running concurrently alongside the minis so if you want to play a decent rebuy there is one out there. There however is not a lot of choice for another non rebuy tourney with a decent amount of runners that has a high payout. You cannot just cater for one type of player as the others will go elsewhere. Fridays Rebuys and add on gets more players I think mainly because it is a Friday people are off the next day so there are more players to play and they have time to sit and play and (enjoy) a game which myself and I assume many others through the week cant do. I play 2 tourneys through the week the 2.20 bh at 8pm and the mini. would I play both of these if they were rebuy or 1more chance probably not. then the only games I ould play would be a Monday triple take down and Fridays Orford one. I would find another site to play the type of games I like. So for me its a No, I know though different folks, have different strokes
Good post @rearender, that all makes perfect sense.
Comments
i used to recollect the uk scene used to be bouncing with 500 and 1k events every week
then rentries come along boom game over
The point of this thread was to specifically ask the question whether or not it would be good to allow one re-entry to the mini, or not.
This has worked well since it was adopted in the main.
I just wondered why Sky hadn't done the same to the mini.
Lots of players play both because of the final table bonus.
One re-entry means more head prizes and bigger prize pools.
Those that didn't wish to re-enter wouldn't have to.
The biggest day for the mini is Friday when it is a rebuy, and the prize pool is double the normal days.
On Sunday it is a £10 buy in.
My last post on this.
Sky introduced exactly the same thing to the main some time ago.
This has helped them to maintain the guarantees since they did it.
Nobody likes to see guarantees being reduced.
There were a couple of moans at the start, but quickly subsided.
The mini like the main runs every night.
On Sunday the buy in is £11.
On Friday it is a £5 rebuy.
Friday got 43 more runners than Thursday
Last night every player spent on average £11, and the prize pool was just about 5k
Every other night it is a £5 buy in and a 2k guarantee.
If I was purely considering myself, I would prefer to have a £11 buy in or a £5 rebuy every night, and play for double the money.
However I do appreciate that this might not suit other players.
So I merely suggested that allowing one re-entry may have a similar positive effect as the one it has had on the main.
Every player would then have the option of re-entering rather than finding another tourney to play, or not.
It would be for each player to make their own choice.
I cant see any downside to offering players the choice.
Isnt a player re-entering exactly the same to the existing players, as another player late entering?
Sky successfully meddled with the main to end up where we are today.
Whether or not that is a good thing is obviously a matter of individual preference. Personally, I prefer the freezeout system whereby I feel I'll have a better chance of booking a win and am happy to make a trade-off against a slightly smaller prize pool for that opportunity. It could also be better for the ecology of the site as a whole if wins are being achieved by a more diverse group of players on average.
Finally, introducing a rebuy into the mini may lead Sky to reevaluate the final table jackpot promo as it'll undoubtedly lead to it being hit more often.
When I pay during the week the fact it starts at 20:30 and I have to get up at 5.30 AM for work when I bust I don't mind because its bed time anyway. At the weekends I have more time to play and would like the chance to re enter when I bust early.
This is just my opinion and would not mind one re entry especially at the weekend not sure if people who work Mon-Fri 9 to 5 feel similar.
I have heard it before.
The same argument was put forward by those that were against a re-entry in the main.
I would agree that the argument sounds logical, but I am not sure if it is true.
I am not going to dispute it as I don't have access to the information that would prove it, or not.
I still cant see the difference between a good player busting out, and re-entering, or another good player late entering.
I have my doubts that many players scrutinise an mtt with 400 plus runners, to judge the strength of the field, before paying a fiver to enter.
The field can change dramatically when late entries are taken into account.
If your concerns are shared by many players, it would seem difficult to justify why the rebuy mini on Friday gets so many runners.
The argument for Bounty Hunters was that they spread the prize money further, which is a good thing.
Bigger prize pools surely attract more players.
While there are any number of tourneys with small buy ins, and not many runners.
As good as he is, Matt Bates didn't start winning the main every day when the re-entry was introduced.
Multiple re-buy and add on (Avengers, 5pm £11 etc...) are a different ball game, players who play these with no intention of re buying and or adding on are pretty much wasting there time in the long run. I always view these game types as if it were three times more than what the initial buy in is.
For instance in the main last night there were 299 runners, 57 re-entries, and 30 got paid.
So only half those that re-entered could have cashed, if they filled the top 30 places.
The re-entries contributed £1700 to the prize pool.
It would be interesting to know how many of the 30 that got paid had re-entered.
If you knew how many of the 57 were regs, and how many of them cashed, then the argument might stand up.
To produce valid stats, you would have to check a few tourneys.
The results would be interesting.
Sky don't seem to differentiate, where other sites do.
On other sites where you must bust out before buying more chips is usually called a re-entry, because you have busted out and are effectively re-entering.
Whereas you can usually buy more chips at the start in a rebuy, and there is an add on.
I only make this point in respect of the fact that if a re-entry were allowed, then the final table bonus would be won more often.
This in my view would be a good thing.
I think you could justify charging a rake on a re-entry, which would probably cover the increased bonus payments.
To charge a 50pence rake on a £5 re-entry surely wouldn't make a difference to most people.
Whereas charging a rake on a Friday £20 rebuy would probably prompt lots of people to be reaching for their keyboards.
I think there is a real difference between a rebuy, and re-entry tournament. If you bust out, you are surely re-entering.
Why does the mini get the least entries on a Sunday?
Is it because of the £11 buy in, or perhaps because of the 7.30 bounty hunter?
It is difficult to think that it is the buy in, because the Friday rebuy is the busiest night, and players spend around £11 per head.
If it is because of the 7.30 tourney, then maybe the times could be adjusted to attract more entries.
It just seems strange that the least entries by far, happen to be on a Sunday.
I do think it is good to have one mini a week that is a freezeout though so I wouldn't like the Sunday mini to change to become a bh.
So it is getting around half the entries.
I wondered if this was caused by the increased buy in, which is a difficult claim if you compare it to Friday.
Or perhaps the number of players that enter the £33 bounty hunter at 7.30.
Why would the Sunday mini end up with the same guarantee as a normal night, despite double the buy in.
I am not arguing that it should be a bounty hunter or not, although if that were the reason, how could you not argue to change it.
There is also rebuys running concurrently alongside the minis so if you want to play a decent rebuy there is one out there. There however is not a lot of choice for another non rebuy tourney with a decent amount of runners that has a high payout. You cannot just cater for one type of player as the others will go elsewhere.
Fridays Rebuys and add on gets more players I think mainly because it is a Friday people are off the next day so there are more players to play and they have time to sit and play and (enjoy) a game which myself and I assume many others through the week cant do.
I play 2 tourneys through the week the 2.20 bh at 8pm and the mini. would I play both of these if they were rebuy or 1more chance probably not. then the only games I ould play would be a Monday triple take down and Fridays Orford one. I would find another site to play the type of games I like.
So for me its a No, I know though different folks, have different strokes