Check It: CineJax | ScriptJax |


Settin' Me Straight

In my previous post I made the following comment regarding the net profit/loss spreadsheet Al was going to post on his blog...

I know for a fact mine will actually be lower (total fees/buyins), especially with the Big Game events, as I never bought directly into those and double tokened into them usually for either a $6 or $8 cost. And most of the time I satellited into the Hoy as well.

In that sentence I was trying to justify - for most everyone, not just myself - how the numbers could be left to question considering the tokens.

However, I followed up that line with...

But lets be honest, anyone who says they satellited into every $75 and $26 event is lying if they say they did it on the 1st try everytime. I'm sure most of us paid less than the actual amount that Al will show, but I don't expect it to be the rock bottom number either.

When Al did eventually post the numbers he added the following...

You may use the insta-Waffles method of justifying your loses but I'm not buying it. A satellite buyin is really no different than my preferred method of hitting up the cash game tables to make my nut for the tournament buyin. If that's the case then I'm ahead because I freerolled into everyone.

And later Hoy chimed in with...

In the end, Al had a better one-paragraph explanation in his Tuesday post this week than I could come up with , but basically to me this is what I like to think of as "recockulous". Folks, as Al puts it better than me, a $26 buyin is a $26 buyin is a $26 buyin. It truly does not matter whether you only paid $8 to buy in to the MATH one week because you had a token. It's still a $26 value coming out of your account and into the tournament prize pool for that event. Period. As Al explains on his blog, this would be no different from someone claiming they freerolled into every single BBT event because they always made sure to win an amount of cash at least equal to that day's BBT tournament buyin every single day before he or she sat down to play the BBT event. It makes no sense whether you won the $26 at the cash tables, won the money in a token sng, or paid $26 cash from your full tilt account. It was a $26 buyin. Period. Accept that, because the logic is sound and the concept is spot-on. And this doesn't even get in to the fact of how would we ever be able to check or verify how many token sngs were lost before you finally won that one token in, say, your 5th or 6th sng? Does your buyin for that night's BBT tournament then become $44 instead of the $26 cash buyin, because you had to play five $8.80 buyin token sngs in order to win your one token? Come on with that. The whole thing is preposterous. Everyone's layout for these tournaments is exactly the same as everyone else's regardless of where the money comes from or what form it takes (token, cash table profits, straight up cash buyin, etc.). So that suggestion I would say is successfully debunked.

In true Hoy style, he puts it out there in the long-winded version, but ya know what, both Hoy and Al are right on this one. In my post yesterday, I teetered both agreeing and disagreeing to a degree, but they put it perfectly. Who gives a fuck how you earn your buy-in? The moment you buy-in that is money out of your control and out of your bankroll - whether cash or token.

So thanks fellas for putting it out there and giving your thoughts. In a weird way, all the above will help me in the future to stop trying to justify break-even or loss situations just because it was a token. That's just tarded. A buy-in is a buy-in is a buy-in.

Until next time, may the felt be with you.

posted by TripJax @ 4:59 PM,


At 9:01 PM, Blogger Instant Tragedy: Just Add Sean said...

But you are still at the top.

I maintained my middle play and middle results :-)


At 10:09 AM, Blogger lightning36 said...

I liked some of your ideas. I think that I was going with the same thought you were -- make it in the money, win if possible. I pretty much disregarded the points and certainly did not base my play on getting points. Basing the scoring on some type of system where hitting the money is most important (have to find a way to somehow look at The Big Game since the payouts are so big ) seems to me to be the way to go.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home