Mutli-Entry A Viewpoint?

So as I'm sure most of you are aware lots of tournament online these days have a multi-entry option basically meaning you can enter 4 times and play all your tables simultaneously. Now I have a question for all you people, is it better to enter 4 times, not looking for the simple reply "yes because you have a better chance at winning/running deep. I'm trying to wonder if just playing the one table is better in terms of concentation (note taking) and just playing better poker and being more focused.

Would like to hear your opinions.

Just as a side note I have bought 4 entries to a MTOPS tonight, so yeah.

Good luck at the tables.

Absolutely horrible for the game....akin to mass tabling regs.

You are making the avg. field much harder because regs drop down to play lower buy in MET's generally, you are accelerating the rake process and finally, I think rebuys and MET's confer on CERTAIN players (and I include myself in this) a looser play syndrome that makes for more all ins early, more bustouts and more rake gobbling rebuys.

My thoughts are: You have paid four times the amount of an entry to one tournament. If, at the end, two or more of your entries make it to FT, do they combine your chips? Or let you play the highest only? if they let you play all your hands, buy a bunch. But I am sure that is not the case, so is the entry low enough compared to the payout that four entries are feasible? I suspect not.

Those multi-entry MTT's don't make a bit of sense to me. If that's what being crazy is, then I'm senseless, out of it, gone-down-the-road, wacko. But no more, no less, that's it.

If your lucky 1 entry is ITM, and you got to run deep just to profit.

If your lucky you'll have 4 different stack sizes at 4 tables at the most critical times of the MTT. I prefer 4 other MTT's, stagger the start times so you have hopefully ITM- late- middle and early stages going. It seems easier to manage.

Randall McMurphy said:

Those multi-entry MTT's don't make a bit of sense to me. If that's what being crazy is, then I'm senseless, out of it, gone-down-the-road, wacko. But no more, no less, that's it.

If your lucky 1 entry is ITM, and you got to run deep just to profit.

If your lucky you'll have 4 different stack sizes at 4 tables at the most critical times of the MTT. I prefer 4 other MTT's, stagger the start times so you have hopefully ITM- late- middle and early stages going. It seems easier to manage.

Click to expand...

I would think it'd be alot easier to manage when the 4 tourneys are all at the same stage/blind level. (similiarly to playing a session of SNG's.. all starting at same time).

I think METS are a bad idea for the poker economy but in the micro buyins I don't think it's a big deal at all (doubt it makes much difference, especially in those MTOPS that are full of bad players who have multi entries).

I personally think it'd be best if they limited everyone to just '2' entries (except perhaps for a special series like the micro turbo MTOPS).

Bubble time x 4 tables, 32 villains + all the different stack sizes of all the players including yourself , no thanks. And you didn't have to underline alot.

Randall McMurphy said:

Bubble time x 4 tables, 32 villains + all the different stack sizes of all the players including yourself , no thanks. And you didn't have to underline alot.

Click to expand...

I was going to put it in CAPITALS & BOLD.
You're assuming that all 4 entries make it to bubble time. Different stack sizes of players isn't much of a problem 'vs.' different stack sizes in relation to different blind sizes.

It might be easier for you but I would guess that most players who regularly multi-table MTT's might prefer to have a group of them all starting at or near the same time (< this is a big reason of why I play on a bunch of different sites.. just so that I can fire up tournaments that are similiar & that start at ~same time).

I guess a different opinion than yours must be scolded.

Are you for real?

Not only have I never seen this (please name some sites that have it) It sounds horrible. 4 buy ins for one game at the same time? How on earth are the final 3 tables set up...I mean, sooner or later you have two or more of your own entries at one table, how does that work? Sounds impossible. Can you only play only one of your hands in this case but choose? Not likely! Are you sure you have this right? It just seems impossible, unless your stacks are combined at some point, but even then...

Wouldn't you be better off in a rebuy game? I hate losing my one entry, but if I lost all 4 without making the money, I would want to puke! Plus, isn't this "legal" multi-using? Why go through all the trouble ensuring that does not happen, only to authorize it in a game? To satisfy the cheaters, in a vain attempt to placate them?

Please check your explanation of this game, and add these missing details. I'd love to watch one!

Full Tilt has them.

I think that is a fair assumption, don't you?

Poker Orifice said:

I was going to put it in CAPITALS & BOLD.
You're assuming that all 4 entries make it to bubble time.

Click to expand...

I think that is a fair assumption, don't you? Sooner or later, you know SOMEONE will! Then what happens when it gets down to 3 tables? The only way it could work is:

Stacks are combined at some point!

There really is no other logical way. You simply COULD NOT allow multiple entries on the same table, otherwise you might end up with 9 "players" that's really only 3 people! I mean, maybe on a prop bet I would do it, but for my own hard earned cash in a MTT? Fu-get-about-it! It's like your one opponent is playing against 8 colluders! Think of the advantage one guy playing 4 spots would have by knowing 8 cards that are out!

And, if you do combine all the stacks, It's going to hit different people at different times, another unfair advantage. Suddenly you go from chip leader at a table to the short stack because someone gets to quadruple up!

Wow, this just sounds goofy!

Wow. Full tilt, really? How many scandals can one entity make before you don't trust them? For me, just one real big one. I guess I'm thinking if you bilk players out of 300 million, you were most likely doing other things as well. I just do not trust that site.

Anyway, I was right, they combine your leftovers at some point. Still, It just sounds a little wacky. Then again, 300 starting chips and 3 minute blinds with a $300.00 buy in sounds wacky to me as well, but I'm sure some can afford it, do it well, and enjoy it, so who am I to judge?

Just don't forget, that's also 4 times the info on your play to tracking software.

wow never heard of these before but they look like they would favor someone who bought in the max entries heavily

uarejelly said:

wow never heard of these before but they look like they would favor someone who bought in the max entries heavily

Click to expand...

I feel like this is correct, if you aren't buying in for maximum entries you are going to be missing out on equity. Considering that tournaments are very top heavy the correct play would have to be to have as large of a % of chips in play from the start.

From the sounds of these tourneys I'm not a fan, but would definitely give it a try if I saw it on a US friendly site. I do like the re-entry concept however.

Michael Paler said:

Wow. Full tilt, really? How many scandals can one entity make before you don't trust them? For me, just one real big one. I guess I'm thinking if you bilk players out of 300 million, you were most likely doing other things as well. I just do not trust that site.

Anyway, I was right, they combine your leftovers at some point. Still, It just sounds a little wacky. Then again, 300 starting chips and 3 minute blinds with a $300.00 buy in sounds wacky to me as well, but I'm sure some can afford it, do it well, and enjoy it, so who am I to judge?

Just don't forget, that's also 4 times the info on your play to tracking software.

Click to expand...

omg, yes they combine when they are drawn in the same table, if they both make it into the money you get paid whatever that payout is.

full tilt is extremely trustworthy given it is now owned by pokerstars

Randall McMurphy said:

I guess a different opinion than yours must be scolded.

Click to expand...

So if I underline something (or bold) that means I'm scolding?
You're obviously entitled to your opinion (never did I say you weren't). I was merely expressing how STONGLY I felt about it (get it?).

Perhaps you've been around Nurse Ratchett for too long... &/or a change in meds. is in order?

Where do you suppose she lives?

Thanks for all the constructive comments!

FT had these since before Black Friday. They were the next big thing. For all those who are speculating on the stacks getting combined, they only do it when they get down to the final 4-5 tables unless they have changed. Not an easy thing to do.

Theoretically, you want your table draws to be random. With multi-players involved there are now restrictions on the draw/table changes which can only cause them to be less random.
If it is unlimited buy ins I can see where that may be problematic. The total number of tables would dictate the actual limit but if there are 100 tables.....

hobonc said:

FT had these since before Black Friday. They were the next big thing. For all those who are speculating on the stacks getting combined, they only do it when they get down to the final 4-5 tables unless they have changed. Not an easy thing to do.

Theoretically, you want your table draws to be random. With multi-players involved there are now restrictions on the draw/table changes which can only cause them to be less random.
If it is unlimited buy ins I can see where that may be problematic. The total number of tables would dictate the actual limit but if there are 100 tables.....

Click to expand...

There's always a restriction on the max. number of entries you can have. Often it is 4, occassionally 6, sometimes just 2 or 3.