Hi Stickyfish,
Welcome to CardsChat.
Glad to see you getting involved, but I just wanted to give you some guidance.
The reply you've provided is a single sentence. On its own, it has little value here on Cards Chat.
If you were to provide an explanation of why you don't like them...MAYBE it would have been. But one-liners are not really appreciated here. If you want access to freerolls like the rest of us, you need to put in the effort like threst of us.
So why is it that you personally don't like them?
How do you propose to avoid such games, given that so many MTT's have them?
What games have no add-on that you would recommend as an option?
Why would these be a realistic option?
You've got to remember that poker isn't a day at the fun-fair. You cannot simply try each game once and expect to have decent or repeatable results. For most money-making players, they have had to find the game which they excel at and have an advantage over the rest of the pack that is exploitable. But as each game plays slightly differently, you need solid strategies for each -- and that is too much work for most people.
In my opinion, I will play the games that I have an advantage in whether they contain an add-on or not. On the one hand, I don't like them because it is like paying double for the same tournament, without having to lose first to do so. And given the value of the chips bought through add-on, it seems foolish not to add-on in most circumstances.
For example, if you have 40 people left in a tourney when the add-on hits, you will typically see at least 75% of players get the add-on. Whilst it provides no great advantage if everyone does it, apart from seeing an extra hand or two or three, not doing so provides a clear disadvantage.
I consider this akin to people who play cash games and do not buy-in for the maximum amount. You're just creating a more difficult path to success for yourself, whereas if you take the add-on, you are either equal or better to your previous position.
There are exceptions here of course:
If very few people are taking the add-on, you can possibly get away without it...but here is where the biggest advantage is, so why not?
If the add-on does not give much better chip purchase value than normal entry, then I might consider avoiding it.
But Because it seems almost like an all or nothing thing, this makes me question why add-ons are even a thing. The answer is, it is a TAX. It is an opportunity for the house to inject more cash into a game. It parades around like some sort of helping hand to the short stacks...and to an extent it is, but it kind of pisses me off to be doing well in a tourney only to have someone start late, play poorly and then get another chance to win, devaluing solid play.
To me, it is sneaky. If your bankroll supports $1.10 games, but there is an add-on...it's really a $2.20 game. Does your bankroll suppor that? No. You cannot arbitrarily double your buy-in and pretend that it sits within your bankroll boundaries.
Finally, the other thing I dislike about the add-on is that in many games, you have late reg, followed by an ongoing rebuy-period which extends for far too long, and then is folloowed by an add-on. So you often see people doing rebuy after rebuy, shoving junk hand after junk hand until the add-on is reached. Meanwhile your table has been flooded with chips, getting split beteween the fish who will eventually hit out of sheer chance.
So if I am going to play a tight, disciplined game (with exploitative tendencies), I'd rather play a knockout as it rewards that type of play more than LAGgy play. However, if I'm feeling a little fishy myself, then a low-cost, rebuy game is considered.
I also prefer rebuys more than re-entries...since a rebuy gives you a chance to win your money back off the people who took it, and similarly, if you have someone giving chips away and rebuying, you want them to stay at your table. So re-entries don't really server anyone's interests except the house.
Cheers,
ObbleeXY
