Bankroll for Sunday Mill Sats

[McMelchior]

[ QUOTE ]
Plz link to where satellite rebuy strategy has been discussed ad nauseam before

[/ QUOTE ]
Search: +satellite +rebuy -"Re:". Remember to set range to a year or so and have a ball.

[ QUOTE ]
if you always double rebuy and addon in a $39 rebuy for a $215 million seat

[/ QUOTE ]I have no idea why anyone would play the $39 rebuy for the $215. Play a $39 FO - they're soft, soft, soft ... and if you lose your chips, play another.

[ QUOTE ]
So saying that you should always double rebuy and addon is simply bad advice for satellites and it really needs to stop being posted.

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe you could elaborate on your point instead of making senseless statements about what "needs to stop".

EDIT: The idea is pretty much, that you need to double up a number of times (probably 4 times - or more - in the $11 rebuy sat) to win a seat. If you don't take a double rebuy when you lose your chips you'll need to double up one more time - and that reduces you EV with 50% (or somewhat close to).

[jeramy576]

[ QUOTE ]
So saying that you should always double rebuy and addon is simply bad advice for satellites and it really needs to stop being posted.

[/ QUOTE ]Maybe you could elaborate on your point instead of making senseless statements about what "needs to stop".

[/ QUOTE ]

I think what jgunnip is trying to say is that telling someone to always double rebuy is way too general of advice. When clearly in a 39R you should never do that but in a 3R you should pretty much always double Rebuy.

[whitcolumn]

are we talking about double rebuying at the beginning or double rebuying back into the tourny?

[Billy Bibbit]

[ QUOTE ]
are we talking about double rebuying at the beginning or double rebuying back into the tourny?

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't really matter, both situations have an equal amount of EV. Whether you should double rebuy depends on the buy-in and the cost of the seat, not on how much of the rebuy period has elapsed.

McMelchior, I don't post here much so I appreciate your summary of previous satellite threads. But I've played literally hundreds of rebuy satellites without double rebuying, and my results suggest that I'm not dead money. Reading what other people post on 2p2 is no substitute for actual playing experience, and thinking about the game on one's own.

Also, the $39 rebuys are much much MUCH more profitable than the $39 freezeouts from the perspective of avg. profit per tournament so it seems odd that you suggest not to play them at all. How many of them have you played to come to the conclusion that they're a waste of time?

[Soulman]

Out of curiosity Billy, do you never double rebuy in a sat, no matter the buy-in?

[Billy Bibbit]

I do double rebuy in regular speed satellites (except for the $39's). They give you a lot more time to outplay people so I think it's worth it. I also used to double rebuy in the $3's but I don't play them anymore, not worth it from a $/hr perspective.

[McMelchior]

Billy, you caught me ... I've never played one single $39 rebuy to the Sunday mill ($39/$215) ... basically because I can't imagine it would be profitable for me. Obv. you have a different experience ...

Let me share my thoughts on them ... and if you care, you can tell me where you think I go wrong:

Rebuy tournaments encourage more loose/aggressive play than FOs. The pay-off would be more seats per entry. My edge would come from countering the more laggie game with a more TAG game. This making my results more card dependent, which I can't see would be beneficial at all.

I can't imagine actually re-buying in a $39/$125, since:

a) Rebuying from the get-go only is profitable if I can win a seat a little more than one out of 3 tournaments (which I don't consider likely), and

b) rebuying if I lose my stack will put me in a spot with less than average stack competing for only marginally more seats - a situation where starting over in another satellite should be more profitable.

So ... if you care to share why this doesn't hold up, and - even better - your personal and successful strategy for these sats, it would be a great contribution!

[ QUOTE ]
Whether you should double rebuy depends on the buy-in and the cost of the seat, not on how much of the rebuy period has elapsed

[/ QUOTE ]
Also if you can explain that one it would be appreciated ... IMHO (and based on experience from hundreds of $11 & $3 turbo rebuy-satellites, and scores of $39 FO satellites) stack to blind ratio is the most important indicator of my (percieved) edge over other players.

Rebuying to 15 BB (in the last 15 minutes of the rebuy period) would be substantially less profitable for me than rebuying to 75 BB (in the first 15 minutes). Simply because if I have 15 BB and lose one hand, I'm in push/fold mode with a - at the best - very marginal edge.

???

[illini43]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't imagine actually re-buying in a $39/$125, since:

a) Rebuying from the get-go only is profitable if I can win a seat a little more than one out of 3 tournaments (which I don't consider likely)

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, with these large rebuys, the prize pools are large enough so more than 1 in 6 win seats. I've never played the 39r's. but I would imagine they award more than 1 in 3 seats with the bulked-up prize pool.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Rebuy tournaments encourage more loose/aggressive play than FOs. The pay-off would be more seats per entry. My edge would come from countering the more laggie game with a more TAG game. This making my results more card dependent, which I can't see would be beneficial at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would be hesitant to rebuy in a 39r to the $215 Sunday Million, but it's tangential to the point I'm about to make:

Your edge in satellites doesn't come from solely from exploiting LAGs; your edge in satellites comes from exploiting the bubble, which your opponents will frequently [censored] up (and yes, the mistake many of your opponents will make on the bubble is to be too loose and aggressive). The most frequent mistake here are big stacks needlessly trying to bully short stacks and essentially giving up boatloads of equity to the rest of the table. There are many times where big stacks with > 90% of winning a seat will continue to raise three or four times an orbit. This is nothing but spew, regardless of the hands they hold, and is equity that we profit from. Conversely, there are some big stacks who play "correctly" by tightening up at the bubble -- and this is entirely profitable as well, because we can steal mercilessly from them once identified.

So I disagree that your results are necessarily card dependent, as the bubble of a satellite opens up lots of room for "creative" play - even though staying tight is optimal for much of the course of the tournament. Satellites merely test a players skill at correctly adapting to the table dynamics.

As opposed to non-satellite tournaments, where we're trying to press our edges and collect chips to make a run deep and go to the FT, the flat payout structure in most satellite structures creates a lot of value for merely *surviving to the bubble* and playing it correctly. An important caveat to note here is that this is entirely dependent on the seat/player ratio: satellites with huge fields and a small quantity of seats really don't deviate from a meta-strategy we would apply in a standard tournament that awards cash prizes.

The $39 and $39r to the $215 is certainly the type of satellite which has a great seat/field ratio, so your overriding goal here should be to survive to the bubble if possible, because good players will have an enormous edge here; this may make us inclined to rebuy if necessary -- however, I'm not exactly sure what effect rebuys will have on our ROI. It's likely player dependent. Players who are confident in their bubble play can likely making rebuying +EV, whereas players who aren't skilled at satellite bubbles should perhaps avoiding rebuys. Having said that, it's questionable whether players who aren't skilled at satellite bubbles should be playing satellites in the first place.

[jgunnip]

[ QUOTE ]
Players who are confident in their bubble play can likely making rebuying +EV, whereas players who aren't skilled at satellite bubbles should perhaps avoiding rebuys

[/ QUOTE ]

good post although I disagree with this part. IMO the more +ev play for players who know how to play a bubble and can exploit the bubble well, is to not rebuy as much. Since there edge is so big late in the the tournament chips accumulated earlier aren't worth as much. Whereas a poor satellite player will benefit more from having a larger chip stack. In other words, I believe if a bad player has X% chance of a seat with Y chips, a good player will have the same X% chance at a seat with fewer than Y chips.