Updated on 04 Aug 26 by
Avatar photo PokerStrategy Editorial
Staff

Is it good for poker when professionals punt in re-entry events?

Should amateur players be happy when pro players with deep pockets play like fish in re-entry tournaments?

Another interesting debate this week during the World Series of Poker about whether it's a good thing when professional players punt in re-entry events. 

The catalyst was this hand from Texas Mike in the $10,000 GGMillion$ event, where he shoved with 83o because it was near to the end of the re-entry period. His gambling logic being that he can try and double up now, and if that doesn't work out, he has one more chance in the same event.  

Naturally, he gets there against the dominating 99, which has led to a discussion about the optics of wealthy high-stakes players punting because they can in re-entry events. 

Texas Mike is widely regarded as one of the best players around today, and a sign of this is that he is a particularly expensive draft pick this year in the $25,000 Fantasy Draft. So it's fair to say he knows his shove is not optimal. 

The perception of re-entries

Poker
It's good when great players punt against you

This debate is an offshoot of the wider re-entry debate. The thing amateur players don't like about re-entry tournaments is the perception that professional players have unlimited bullets in these events. 

The amateur player is usually only playing the one bullet, so they have to treat their tournament life with great care. The wealthy professional, in contrast, doesn't have to do much in the way of hard work before re-entry closes. They can just punt, and if it doesn't work out, they can punt again. 

I've never particularly been against re-entry tournaments, but I do understand this perception issue. In particular, if you have seen a player bust out on Day 1A and then you go on to see them win it after regging Day 1B, something does not quite sit right, especially if you came up in the era of freezeouts. 

When great players become fish

Perception aside, I think this hand is an example of why re-entries are possibly a good thing for amateur players. I don't want to play against Texas Mike if he can only play one bullet and therefore takes it seriously, but I'm very happy to play against this version of Texas Mike. 

Make no mistake about it, this is a minus EV play, and while he is an absolute crusher overall, at this exact moment, he is a fish.

Indeed, if he weren't a professional poker player with deep pockets, and you heard that someone in this tournament had just punted with 83o, most people would be declaring this the best tournament in the world with the worst players. It's only because he's known to be a successful poker player with a big bankroll that it rubs people up the wrong way. 

I still have no personal issue with re-entry tournaments, but similarly, I don't mind if unlimited re-entries are curbed purely for perception issues. If amateur players don't want them, then it's probably good for the game if we reduce the impact of re-entries. 

But make no mistake. It's good for everybody if good players remove their edge entirely and punt like this. It sucks in the moment if you run into a bad beat, but it's great for the game overall.