Rebuy Collusion
I have noticed an alarming trend in events that have unlimited rebuys lately. Players are making agreements to go all on during the rebuy period. Now making any kind of agreement with another player about how you will act on your hand in a game or tournament is definitely against the rules but players justify this behavior by saying that it is good for the other players at the table or in the tournament. This has gotten so bad that there is some implicit collusion going now in as much as many player now understand that going mad during the rebuy period of a tournament increases their cashes of winning or cashing and so they are doing this with other players without explicit agreement. This kind of implicit collusion is also seen in the case of an all-in player in a tournament where the other players left in the hand will check a hand down. But in the case of rebuy events, the implicit collusion has a much deeper effect on the outcome of the game.
I am, actually, very confused and surprised that so many players either do not understand why agreeing to go all-in in the rebuy period of the tournament is collusion or are willing to defend and justify the behavior. I think this stems from a lack of clear understanding that there are two types of equity in a tournament: your chances of winning or cashing (regardless of ROI) and your chances of making money in the event in the long term. It is 100% clear that if your only interest were making money then your ideal result in a rebuy tournament would be to buy in for double right away and then not have to buy-in again before you did a double add-on (where a double add-on was allowed, single add-on otherwise). This is because then the prize pool would be laying you the maximum price while, at the same time, making sure you added on would maximize your chances of doing well in the tournament. In fact, some people buy-in for double then basically don’t play the rebuy period in some online tournaments then just do the double add-on because this strategy is so ideal for return on investment.
What is also clear is that if the only thing you cared about was the title, winning the bracelet as in the WSOP or the tournament, or Player of the Year points or races then the ideal strategy would be to move in blind every hand of the rebuy period no matter even if this meant that you bought in for more than first place paid (which could happen under this stratgey). You would, in fact, only stop employing this strategy if you got your chips up to par for the final table. This strategy would maximize your chances of cashing for POY points or winning for bracelets regardless of what the investment in the event was towards that goal. You will almost certainly spend more than cashing returns under this strategy and will most likely spend more than most of the final table places pay. So this is not a good strategy for making money, just for getting points and winning titles.
Okay, so it should be clear that there are two kinds of equity in a rebuy: one has to do basically with buying the title or the bracelet and the other to do with actually trying to maximize your monetary earn. If two players verbally agree to go all in the problem is that they are in some sense making the choice for the other players at the table whether they want to play a high variance tournament or a low variance tournament, whether they want to have the prize pool lay them a smaller price in exchange for a higher chance of getting the win. It is not clear that two players going all-in every hand is good for the other players at the table because it will force them for sure to invest much more money in the event which will increase their chances of a cash or win but may not be their desired strategy. And because they are not party to the agreement, it just shouldn’t be allowed. What is much clearer though, is that this kind of collusion has a very deep and negative impact on the other players in the tournament.
Let’s take this to the extreme to demonstrate this. If you have a table of 9 players who are all good players, better than par in the tournament, and all 9 players agree to move all-in every hand of the rebuy period then I think we can all agree that the winner of the tournament would come from that table a higher percentage of the time than any other table in the tournament. So these players agreeing to do this are cheating every other player in the tournament because they are having a direct effect by agreement on the outcome of the event which is the very definition of collusion. In fact, this happened recently in a WSOP. The players did not out and out agree to the all-in move but the table had a bunch of action players who understood that if one of them started employing this strategy they all would (which is the kind of implicit collusion I talked about above). When that table broke 7 of the 9 players at the table were the chip leaders at their new tables and the winner of the event did come from that table. I want to make it clear that they did nothing wrong. The implicit collusion is built into the rules. Which is the very problem with this kind of event in the first place.
These events create an unfair playing field where the larger your bankroll the more likely you can buy a title or buy POY points. In every other tournament on the planet once you have bought in, whether you ponied up the cash or won your way in through a freeroll, everyone is on a level playing field. We all start with the same number of chips and go from there. That is not the case with rebuy events at all. Not only does the collusion, implicit or explicit, have a deep impact on the other players in an event, but someone’s bankroll going into an event also has a deep impact on the event. My wallet should not increase the likelihood of me winning a bracelet. My skill should. Period.
I thought that this type of behavior would be cause for disqualification from the tournament. I know if there are any collusion on UB.com you would be kicked off the site in a minute. My thought is to call this activity out to the dealer immediately when it happens and if they aren’t receptive, ask for an officials ruling… Bottom Line: This isn’t right!! Bad sportsmanship at best (gaming the system), straight up cheating at it’s worst.
It can never be stopped.
Unlimited rebuy tournies are unprofessional and potentially unfair for the reason in the above article.
Limited rebuys (such as one to two rebuys) gives players the option to buy in cheap in hopes of either building their stacks by grinding faster than others, or by shooting to get lucky early, or a combination of both styles.
The other reason for the ‘limit rebuy’ is to give players a ‘second life’, meaning some people like the idea of playing aggressive with the shorter stack early on and if they bust ou and don’t double up to match the other ‘piad for’ chips, then the shoot again with the rebuy using the same strategy. This strategy can be easily debated.
These are the only two reasons behind a limited rebuy.
No offense intended, but you really come off as a cry baby in this article. 1st of all, You know exactly what a rebuy event is when you are signing up. People gamble during the rebuy period because it will help you build a chipstack to attack other stacks at the later stages. Just because people have an understanding of this, DOES NOT in any way make it collusion. These are the most ridiculous accusations you could ever make, and you make yourself look like a complete idiot for posting this.
And like you, the 2 people who responded have 0 comprehension of what a Rebuy Event even is.
WOW!!! mike is mad!!!! calm down dude!!! annie is world class…!!!!
Mike says “no offense intended” and then goes on to call her an idiot. Unreal…
If he was unable to understand what she is saying then I might be forgiving. But she clearly states to win points, braclets or money in a tournament should not be a reward because of someones net worth or their ability to out spend (without causing harm to ones finances) other players. She is clearly against the tournament officials that allow for such a game to be played.
I saw Phil H. berate Annie during a tournament about her brother. She was anything and everything but rude to him. She can handle your remarks well, Im sure of it.
I have to disagree too. If 8 people are going all in then the optimal strategy for the 9th player is to wait until he AA or whatever and shove and 8x up, for the price of one entry.
What limits this type of collusion is the concept called “position” which is ignored in this article.
Saying this is a profitable strategy ignores the same problem with the Martingale strategy, which is doubling your bet everytime you lose a 2 to 1 bet to win the first bet.