Poker News

The opinions in this editorial do not reflect the positions of the ownership or management of Poker News Daily.

In the past couple of years – perhaps due to the shrinkage of the poker economy, perhaps to ensure notable names stick around a bit longer – a particular tournament format has reared its head on several major poker tours. The “re-entry” tournament (where players who are knocked out on an earlier Day One of play can pony up another buy-in and play on another Day One) has become popular on the World Poker Tour, the European Poker Tour and several smaller venues. It is time that this particular format is ended in the world of poker, less the game become more elitist and less egalitarian.

Back in the mid-2000s, tournament schedules often featured something that, while popular for deep pocketed professionals, was actually a detriment to the game. Rebuy events were popular because a large prize pool could be built without the hassle of going through a large field towards the payday. The rebuy tournament fell out of favor, however, when clearer minds actually looked at how the rebuy tournaments affected the game.

In 2009, the World Series of Poker quit offering rebuy tournaments due to the perceived advantage that players with a large bankroll would have over those that didn’t. Quite honestly, players are going to play a different style if they know they are going to take several shots instead of being limited to their one bullet. For example, at the 2006 WSOP, Daniel Negreanu famously re-bought 48 times in a tournament (a record); in 2007, Layne Flack would rebuy 33 times on his way to winning the $1500 Pot Limit Omaha bracelet. These instances led to the removal of the rebuy events beginning with the 2009 WSOP – because it seemed as if players were “buying” bracelets – and the rebuy phenomenon cooled for a while.

With tournament attendance falling after the financial collapse of 2008, the major tournaments were left to try to “pump up” their prize pools while contending with more fiscally concerned poker players. This led to the development of the “re-entry” tournament which was just a thinly veiled “rebuy” tournament, for all practical purposes. The Everyday Joe who had his “one shot” at poker immortality now had to face off against the cash-flush pros who could take two, three or even more shots at taking down an event.

This was particularly evident at the most recent stop on the WPT. The Borgata Poker Open, long one of the most popular events on the WPT schedule (as it is one of the few East Coast stops on the circuit), not only offered players knocked out on Day 1A the chance to re-enter on Day 1B, it also allowed players eliminated within the first four levels of each Day One action the option to “re-enter” the tournament ON THE SAME DAY. Of course, this built a large prize pool (the 1181 entries generated nearly a $4 million prize pool and offered the largest first place payday to this point of the WPT’s Season XI schedule) but it also, in theory, affected those players who only had “one shot” from being able to play the aggressive “multi-shot” style that was in play by moneyed professionals.

One of the charms of the game of poker is that it is, befitting of its development in the United States, a perfect expression of equality, democracy and fair play. Legendary poker journalist and author Lou Krieger has said it best, stating, “Not only is poker good for you, it’s the American way – where winners play fair, have the right stuff, and nothing else matters – except, perhaps, a bit of luck every now and then.”

“Poker is a microcosm of all we admire and disdain about capitalism and democracy,” Krieger says in another of his musings. “It can be rough-hewn or polished, warm or cold, charitable and caring or hard and impersonal, fickle and elusive…but ultimately it is fair and right and just.”

With the “re-entry” tournaments – as with its brethren in the “rebuy” events – that “perfect storm” of fairness, equality and democratic principal is lost. Although the poker tours (and their host casinos) enjoy having full tables at their premiere events and offering sizeable prize pools, there isn’t that level playing field that many popular sporting contests attempt to ensure. By limiting the Main Events of major poker circuits to that “one shot” principal, the game of poker maintains its integrity.

For now, the “re-entry” tournaments seem to be ingrained into the poker landscape. If it continues, however, we may see the Everyday Joe pass on these events, as they cannot compete equally against the deep pockets (and money sharing) that the top professionals employ in these tournaments. If we lose the “amateurs” by making too many top tournaments these “re-entry” animals, we are actually harming the game more than improving it.

5 Comments

  1. ps0054 says:

    But if you only have the money for a single entry wouldn’t buying in on the last available day put you on even footing — nobody could go crazy because there is no opportunity to re-enter on the last day.

    I am not a big fan of multiple day one tournaments either (although with the WSOP Main Event there probably is no choice) because the “light” day ones have fewer chips in play thus offering those entering with a larger field on a “big” day one an opportunity to acquire a much larger stack that what would be available on a lighter day.

  2. LBDAVE says:

    agree 100%….no rebuys on premier tourneys….i don’t play in any local rebuys….so boring…….and unfair!! a $100 buy-in is a $100 buy-in…not a $1000 buy in if someone had the extra money to buy in 10 times…should be same with the big boys…WSOP etc.

    a football game starts with 22 players when the whistle blows…they don’t get to “save” their players….for later. Most coaches play their best players up front….win, win, win……..if they screw up and get hurt, reserves are called…..

  3. Earl Burton says:

    Hey PS,

    If you can choose your starting day, then I would agree with your first paragraph. That was the object of this discussion was that re-entry events don’t provide a level playing field for those that have the $$$ to be able to take multiple shots.

    I don’t mind multiple Day Ones so much because sometimes situations (potential field size, casino size, etc.) dictate that it has to go that way. Where I do agree with you, however, is that they should balance the fields so that the same numbers play on each Day One.

    Dave, I can see we agree!

    Thanks for reading, guys!

    Earl

  4. BalerChick says:

    What is great about a re-entry is that when I have to take time off work, drive three hours, and pay for two nights at the casino, I can still play tournament poker if I get coolered in the first few levels.
    Plus, a reentry is fundamentally different than a rebuy: Negraneau knew his chips would be at his table and he’d have a chance to win them back, but with a re-entry you get seated at a different table and have to start all over with normal stacks seated at your table.
    As recreational player, I like re-entries but would never play a re-buy.

  5. Earl Burton says:

    Hello Baler,

    I have to be honest, that is something that I had not considered. It is good for someone in the position that you state; rather than having your one shot crushed within moments, you have the option to take another shot. An excellent point you bring up there.

    As to the differences between rebuy/re-entry, you also have a good point. You do have to re-start the event at a different table and don’t have the option of regaining the chips you’ve lost at the same patch of felt.

    You bring up some excellent arguments for the re-entry tournamnet, Baler! Thanks for reading!

    Earl

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *