1
 |
attik34 United States. Jan 18 2011 15:08. Posts 92 | | |
Just curious as to what the feelings about this are on this site. What I've read on other sites is pretty much against it. I personally don't see how it can be a good thing.
The high stakes level is going to now be saturated with regs and good players 4x and then some fish 1x'ing. It also hurts the lower level in two ways imo
1) It will push more good players down to that level. People playing 26's are now going to be playing 5's 4x and so on.
2) It makes its MUCH more difficult to get started and BR properly
If you are a micro guy, and they make too many of these tourneys multi-entry then you are screwed into playing out of your BR, or doing the -EV thing and single reging. I'm fine with having this as an option, but they need to make new tourneys so rather than change current ones.
Apparently the entire double guarantee week is going to be multi-entry, every tournament.
Seems like its going to be bad.
Also the way merging works seems to be terrible. If there are 2 tables and you have the top 2 stacks, and it breaks to FT you get hosed. And I don't even want to think about the ICM calculations that people could come up with...eww...
All in all, I kinda like that FTP is trying stuff, trying to revolutionize the game, but this isn't it, and I hope they don't get out of control with this idea.
|
| |
|
|
1
| |
Why is single entry -EV? I can see that it should be higher variance, but shouldn't it be +EV because you never get hosed by stack merging? |
|
|
1
|
attik34 United States. Jan 18 2011 15:28. Posts 92 | | |
single entry has to be bad. Its chips in the tournament that you are passing on. It's like not rebuying or adding on. |
| |
|
|
1
| |
I don't see the problem. Can't you just treat it as a rebuy? Then having e.g. two entries has strictly less than twice the EV of a single entry due to the merging. (Obviously you should be entering again after busting, though.) |
|
|
1
|
attik34 United States. Jan 18 2011 16:16. Posts 92 | | |
i would assume you'd treat it as a rebuy, but you aren't gong to buy in one time then only buy in again if you bust. You are losing chips if you don't max buy in from the start.... |
| |
|
|
1
 |
[GiTM]-Ace United States. Jan 18 2011 17:10. Posts 1585 | | |
whats the max buyin? I didn't know there was a limit |
|
| [GiTM]- GoSu in the Making | |
|
|
1
|
Zep United States. Jan 18 2011 18:08. Posts 2292 | | |
if you're terrible it's going to be -EV and if you're good it's +EV. simple as that. It's not going to do much to your long term variance. However, I'm not sure about your short term variance. It's funny how FTP caters to skill while PS caters to short stacking. |
|
| NeillyJQ: I really wanted to prove to myself I could beat NL200, I did over a small sample, and believe Ill be crushing there in the future. | |
|
|
1
| |
| | On January 18 2011 15:16 attik34 wrote:
i would assume you'd treat it as a rebuy, but you aren't gong to buy in one time then only buy in again if you bust. You are losing chips if you don't max buy in from the start.... |
I don't understand. Suppose 4 people play a rebuy. Do they together have more than 4x the EV of 1 person? (Of course, if you are a winning player, you get more EV by buying in 4 times, but you could also just play 4 tournaments, buying in once to each.) |
|
|
1
|
attik34 United States. Jan 18 2011 20:17. Posts 92 | | |
Some tourneys you can only buy in a set amount of times, like the kitchen sink is like...everything ever and has 4 entries.
And as far as it being -ev based on your skill that makes no sense. You can't tell me that a good player wouldnt be better off in a tournament if he had 4 bi's....
|
| |
|
|
1
| |
Well if the good player is playing 4 entries, he's playing 3 less entries for some other tourney.... It's not like the good players can just play an endless number of tournies. So in that particular tourney, the good player should have slightly less than 4x his EV. But if the good player could find 3 other similar buyin tournaments (and is playing his max number of tables regardless), it would be better for his EV to play a single entry into each. |
|
|
1
|
attik34 United States. Jan 18 2011 21:46. Posts 92 | | |
i agree with that concept....but for each tournament that he is registered in NOT at max buy in he is losing equity in those tourneys
|
| |
|
|
1
 |
Sanity United States. Jan 19 2011 02:38. Posts 1076 | | |
| | On January 18 2011 14:28 attik34 wrote:
single entry has to be bad. Its chips in the tournament that you are passing on. It's like not rebuying or adding on. |
lol. no |
|
|
1
| |
| | On January 18 2011 20:46 attik34 wrote:
i agree with that concept....but for each tournament that he is registered in NOT at max buy in he is losing equity in those tourneys
|
No, because if he were losing equity in those tourneys, he'd be doing better by playing 4 entries in a single tourney than 4 single entries in multiple tourneys. Think about it this way: a single player playing a multientry tournament shouldn't be any different than 4 players playing a rebuy tournament. So entering more than once can only decrease your EV / table (due to stack merging).
The reason I can see to do multi-entry is to get higher volume in big buy-in tourneys that you might not otherwise get a chance to play (e.g. a high stakes reg entering a 1k tourney 4x). This should only be good for lower stakes players unless it's the case that the top players aren't hitting their limit of number of tables to play right now, which I don't think is the case. |
|
|
|
Contact Users: 875 Active, 1 Logged in - Time: 01:43
