Norman Chad's 'X' comments on re-entry tournaments and Maria Konnikova's bracelet win

[blkmoney12]

Poker commentator, Norman Chad, made a tweet maybe a month or so ago, regarding his disdain for re-entry tournaments. His comment was directed towards a first-time winner and pokerstars ambassador, Maria Konnikova. The tweet is in the video below.

So, could the comment directed at Maria Konnikova be handled differently?
Should the fact that Maria's bracelet was won through an online tournament with a multi-state player pool take away her accomplishment?
Should the structure of these tournaments be changed? Why or why not?

Take a look at the video below and offer opinions, if you would like.

Thank you for taking the time to comment.

 

[jaymfc]

I love me some norman but there is no doubt he is a little bit "out there".
everyone has a right to their own opinion on rebuy vs freezeouts (I hate rebuys)
but when you are playing a rebuy and following the rules, nothing else matters.
blame the people who organized the tournaments not the players.
just as I hate rebuys there are millions of people who love them and should get to play
the games they like too. sure it favors the financially well off but don't join if you don't like the rules.
you can rebuy as many times as allowed and still lose. "there's no crying in poker"

 

[Shells]

I, too, like Norman Chad. In this case, he probably should have weighed his words just a bit before posting on 'X'. It was suggested that there were more players in that particular tournament who also decided to re-enter multiple times (even suggested that some were former bracelet winners) so, why pick on Maria?! I think Norm has regretted centering out Maria but it's hard to walk back his original words without continued criticism. And this will definitely not be the last time that a person who wins a tournament will have used up four entries.

I get where Norm is coming from with the multiple re-entries but I also see how this is likely a good business decision - after all, poker is a business and the owners want to make money, too. Like @jaymfc said...'there are millions of people who love to play them (rebuys/re-entries) and should get to play'.

 

[hardongear]

I like Norman. However he should have never used her name. Period

As for his thoughts of rebuy MTT's(bracelet event or not). COMPLETELY 110% AGREE. Rebuy MTT's are just awful and terrible for the majority of players, growing the game and the game in general. They're hugely favor the rich professionals. Who don't need anymore advantages as the rec, hobby and avg player is already at a huge enough disadvantage before he even sits down. Endless rebuys are just kicking the avg rec hobby player right in the balls after he's already down.

As for Online bracelet events. They're only ruining what once use to be something prestigious. So many players have a wsop bracelet now.....it's kinda meh who cares. Just another trophy now nothing special at all. Unless it's a Main Event bracelet and there's a way to tell it is.

They should have went with rings for online WSOP events. <-----Such an obvious easy choice. Someone wasn't thinking.

Late registration lasting 3+ hours in some of these MTT's is just freaking insane as well.

Cheers!!!

 

[Mortis]

I agree with his stance on unlimited rebuys. However, this was a poorly timed tweet to talk about his position on rebuys. 3 rebuys in an online tournament isn't even that much, especially when there are people who have talked about rebuying into a tournament 4, 6, 10 times.. to the point where they had to make the Top 3 to even come out positive and sometimes they would win it. Personally, I try not to rebuy more than twice in a tourney. The way I see it, if I can't get it done in 3 bullets, then it's not my game to win. I don't even like rebuying more than once, tbh. I seek out freezeouts and single rebuys.

I know he has criticized rebuy tournaments before, but, Maria didn't deserve to be called out and criticized about this. Calling her out on it was in very poor taste.

 

[RALF_AK]

This comment is regrettable, anyone who does not want to play tournaments with re-entries can opt for freezout tournaments.

 

[MK_]

Well ugh.... that is disappointing, she won fair and square,

it's a rebuy so she can rebuy just as anyone else can too,

normally I find him hilarious though😎👍

 

[Urameshi]

it sucks for her to be called out like that after winning a bracelet, but he is not wrong.
people are just playing tourneys like a slot machine. You go all in, bust, rebuy, until you build a stack.

 

[Oldguard]

Maria should be happy for the attention, not bemoan the idea because she is a woman Norman singled her out! Playing the gender card diminishes her accomplishment as a winner (all winners are lucky). So move on, Maria.

 

[SpanRmonka]

How about he calls out and names the players who re bought 3 or 4 times and didn't win? Surely they are more worthy of some criticism?

On average I don't like re entry tournaments, but also don't like that if you end up all in with KK vs AA and lose thats your whole tournament done!

I think the period of time for re entry should be shorter, but this usually equates to be a similar time to the late reg....

Re entries and late reg allow more players to play, which puts more money in the pot, so in the end it is good for all of us, but the benefit is weighted towards the better, richer pros!!

 

[SPANKYSN]

I, too like Norman Chad. He can sometimes be hard to take. While I agree about the rebuys, it was downright rude to single out Maria. Many tournaments, including the televised WPT tournaments have rebuys. It is a shame that his ill advised post takes a little air out of what should be a proud moment for Maria. Rebuys or not, she won, and that is no easy task. Norman should know this, and he might want to put a sock in it next time...maybe he should stick to complaining about his ex.

 

[sibkaz]

There are rebuys in the rules, so everything is right!

 

[Norman Chad]

My bad.
I feel awful that I put cloud cover over the sunny skies of Maria's success.
I was simply repeating my oft-stated argument about the unfair nature of multiple-reentry poker, and she was collateral damage.
I meant no harm to her -- I have pointed out other players (all men, BTW) who have benefited from the format.

 

[dorsk]

There are rebuys in the rules, so everything is right!

Most small stakes tours have 1-3 re-entries. I’m not a big fan of this. But since the decrease of 90% compared to the heydays, the re-entries are more or less necessary to have a suitable guarantee beyond pennies.
And since GG and Stars have 80% of the player pool, the re-entries on other sites are inevitable.
Personally I am anti rebuy and anti re-entry.

 

[dorsk]

I, too, like Norman Chad. In this case, he probably should have weighed his words just a bit before posting on 'X'. It was suggested that there were more players in that particular tournament who also decided to re-enter multiple times (even suggested that some were former bracelet winners) so, why pick on Maria?! I think Norm has regretted centering out Maria but it's hard to walk back his original words without continued criticism. And this will definitely not be the last time that a person who wins a tournament will have used up four entries.

I get where Norm is coming from with the multiple re-entries but I also see how this is likely a good business decision - after all, poker is a business and the owners want to make money, too. Like @jaymfc said...'there are millions of people who love to play them (rebuys/re-entries) and should get to play'.

I’m on Norm’s side. Read Konnikowa’s book. Didn’t impress me much.
Rebuys favor the deep pockets. Rebuys will never be real tours in my opinion. They’re “Elons.”

 

[jaymfc]

My bad.
I feel awful that I put cloud cover over the sunny skies of Maria's success.
I was simply repeating my oft-stated argument about the unfair nature of multiple-reentry poker, and she was collateral damage.
I meant no harm to her -- I have pointed out other players (all men, BTW) who have benefited from the format.

most agree on your stance on rebuys but
have the stones to call out the host or the venues, not the people (men or women) who follow the rules.

 

[Tammy]

My bad.
I feel awful that I put cloud cover over the sunny skies of Maria's success.
I was simply repeating my oft-stated argument about the unfair nature of multiple-reentry poker, and she was collateral damage.
I meant no harm to her -- I have pointed out other players (all men, BTW) who have benefited from the format.

Well, despite the ill-timed tweet last year, I'm happy to have you here at CardsChat! Welcome Norman!

On the topic at hand, regardless how I feel about the reentry aspect, unfortunately that seems to be the nature of most (if not all) WSOP Summer tournaments...if we want that to change, we as players need to make our voices heard. Though I'm not sure we're in the majority on that. Can't blame the players themselves who are following the structure of the tournament. I've known of many pros who reenter many times. It's just the nature of the beast these days. :/

 

[dorsk]

Well, despite the ill-timed tweet last year, I'm happy to have you here at CardsChat! Welcome Norman!

On the topic at hand, regardless how I feel about the reentry aspect, unfortunately that seems to be the nature of most (if not all) WSOP Summer tournaments...if we want that to change, we as players need to make our voices heard. Though I'm not sure we're in the majority on that. Can't blame the players themselves who are following the structure of the tournament. I've known of many pros who reenter many times. It's just the nature of the beast these days. :/

Sounds good to “make our voices heard.” But it’s a lost cause. The nature of the beast is also called profit maximizing. We can accept that - or quit.

 

[Debi]

My bad.
I feel awful that I put cloud cover over the sunny skies of Maria's success.
I was simply repeating my oft-stated argument about the unfair nature of multiple-reentry poker, and she was collateral damage.
I meant no harm to her -- I have pointed out other players (all men, BTW) who have benefited from the format.

Fair enough.

I don't mind 1 re-entry, but it does get out of hand when they are unlimited. There are not many games and/or sports that give you all of those do overs.

 

[dorsk]

I accept the New Standard of re-entries, but I will never ever like it. I do the initial BI and make no re-entries. If I bust I’m out. There can be some advantages of this freezeout approach. Most importantly though is to recognize that the way to play re-entry tours has some alterations through the earlier stages of a MTT. My experience doesn’t cover more than max three re-entries. If there are more allowed it is basically a rebuy tour.

 

[fergysteve]

I'm not the biggest fan of re-entries, but if that's the rules of the particular tournament in question then there should be no issue if the winner has re-bought. In some ways it is impressive - they have likely had to come back from a short stack position after the re-buy. No-one is obligated to play in these types of tournament. Freezeouts are available, albeit much less frequent I think.