How does Daniel Negreanu make money? (MTT strategy)

[Paul B.]

From his CardPlayer article:
[ QUOTE ]
I answered a hypothetical question a while back that went something like this: Let’s say you are in the WSOP main event, and on the very first hand dealt, you have A-K offsuit in the big blind. Everyone folds to the small blind, who exposes his cards to you and goes all in with Q-J suited. Would you call?

You should — seriously. You would win the pot 60 percent of the time, meaning that six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon! That is too good an offer to pass up. You could justify folding as a 53 percent or even 55 percent favorite in this situation, but 60 percent is just too much equity for any mortal to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
From his CardPlayer article:
[ QUOTE ]
I answered a hypothetical question a while back that went something like this: Let’s say you are in the WSOP main event, and on the very first hand dealt, you have A-K offsuit in the big blind. Everyone folds to the small blind, who exposes his cards to you and goes all in with Q-J suited. Would you call?

You should — seriously. You would win the pot 60 percent of the time, meaning that six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon! That is too good an offer to pass up. You could justify folding as a 53 percent or even 55 percent favorite in this situation, but 60 percent is just too much equity for any mortal to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably by knowing the correct definition of 'EV', which is clearly different than whatever you think it is.

[Parlay Slow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
From his CardPlayer article:
[ QUOTE ]
I answered a hypothetical question a while back that went something like this: Let’s say you are in the WSOP main event, and on the very first hand dealt, you have A-K offsuit in the big blind. Everyone folds to the small blind, who exposes his cards to you and goes all in with Q-J suited. Would you call?

You should — seriously. You would win the pot 60 percent of the time, meaning that six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon! That is too good an offer to pass up. You could justify folding as a 53 percent or even 55 percent favorite in this situation, but 60 percent is just too much equity for any mortal to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably by knowing the correct definition of 'EV', which is clearly different than whatever you think it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

[sweetjazz]

I think (hope) the OP is referring to passing on the 55% gamble, not taking the 60% gamble.

The WSOP structure is a bit unique and has relatively slowly escalating blinds. So I guess it is possible that you can profitably pass up a 55% edge early on, but I am skeptical.

Matt Matros did a rough analysis of this topic in one of his cardplayer articles, iirc.

[Riverman]

Most every top player who I have seen weigh in on this other than Hellmuth agrees with Daniel including Paul Phillips, Fossilman, Barry Greenstein, and others. I don't know if there is a "right" answer or not, but I'm inclined to think the aforementioned players know what they are talking about.

[Zele]

What edge are you waiting for, and how do you intend to achieve it without seeing opponents' cards or having the nuts?

[JackCase]

[ QUOTE ]
From his CardPlayer article:
[ QUOTE ]

You should — seriously. You would win the pot 60 percent of the time, meaning that six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon! That is too good an offer to pass up. You could justify folding as a 53 percent or even 55 percent favorite in this situation, but 60 percent is just too much equity for any mortal to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are obviously missing something here. You apparently don't understand what "+EV" means, or don't understand how to play MMTs.

Quotes below from an old thread on this subject:

Greg Raymer:

[ QUOTE ]
TONS of big name players busted out on day 1 of the WSOP this year (well, day 1 and 2, because of the split field, but you know what I mean). And if you knowingly pass up a 60:40 opportunity, you're not a top player.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[/ QUOTE ]

Paul Phillips:

[ QUOTE ]
I've said I'll take ANY edge (or even ANY COIN FLIP) early, and that NOBODY is good enough to intentionally refuse a 60/40 edge early. Repeatedly applying a 60/40 edge would make you one of the top players in tournament poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Paul B.]

Well, I certainly got schooled.

I thought for sure that getting knocked out 40% of the time in the first hand would be -EV, since having double the starting stack doesn't necessarily make it SO MUCH more likely that you'll win (place ITM).

[Pov]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I certainly got schooled.

I thought for sure that getting knocked out 40% of the time in the first hand would be -EV, since having double the starting stack doesn't necessarily make it SO MUCH more likely that you'll win (place ITM).

[/ QUOTE ]

It definitely doesn't make it all that much more likely in a large field, but consistently folding as a 60/40 favorite when faced with aggression doesn't do much for your chances either. You can't fold your way to the money and even in a slow structure you don't get that many chances to get your money in as a significant favorite. You have to take it when you can or you're just relying on great run of cards.

Correctly estimating you have an edge (and fold equity can be a part of that) and then having the balls to get your money in IS tournament skill.

[whiskeytown]

remember, a double up at this stage usually buys you a bad mistake or rundown or two... -

I have found whenever I take an early double up I can usually milk the momentum for quite a while - I can call stacks of $500 with AJ and risk being dominated cause I've earned some extra staying power...

I'd have to ask some WSOP powerhouses - (Greg?) - but I would suspect an early double-up at the WSOP would more then pay for itself in the extra confidence and aggression you can then purchase for yourself each hand you play...

I'd have a hard time doing it the first time I played the WSOP - but if I saw that after doing it a couple years, I'd make the call - I AM the fav....after all -

Every time you flip those cards over and you're a 60% fav...you played the hand correctly - even if you lose - you made the right play - took me a long time to get that in my head.

RB

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, I certainly got schooled.

I thought for sure that getting knocked out 40% of the time in the first hand would be -EV, since having double the starting stack doesn't necessarily make it SO MUCH more likely that you'll win (place ITM).

[/ QUOTE ]

It approximately doubles (slightly less than doubles) your chances of making the money and/or winning the tournament.

[sweetjazz]

This Cardplayer article by Matt Matros (http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_magazine/archives/?a_id=15093&m_id=65576) addresses the issue.

He agrees with Daniel that you shouldn't pass up a 60/40 edge, but disagrees that it is okay to pass up a 55/45 edge and suggests that only a very good player should pass up a 53/47 edge.

[Dids]

I won't bother doing anything to this thread, but I'd wager than the MTT forum is probably the best place for MTT strategy. Mostly because you'll get MUCH better answers.

[MyTurn2Raise]

yeah...check out some of the FAQs that have gone up in MTT...this topic comes up over and over

[Big Limpin]

[ QUOTE ]
...six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon!

[/ QUOTE ]

Handsome, i think this is important. Remeber, to the "top pros", their $10k is far from scared money. I they bust, they can pretty much just shrug their shoulders, say "meh", and move on. For DN to have a few free days to play the side games, when they are at their juiciest, makes a big difference.
A secondary consideration would be that doubling allows loss of a allin and still have avg stack. It allows him to make some plays, and take some ppl of the best hand, which is a tool more valuable to him than to you or I.

Win= valuable extra chips
Lose= walk over to the side games and sit...where EV may be as much or even more than sitting a few more days in the main event. Its certainly not a big EV hit if he loses.

*Although, for DN to make the final table of WSOP would be worth much more than the true $ prize, as his endorsemnt value rises even higher than it is now. I suspect his is a consideration of many top players...winning WSOP ME is worth more than the prize, not to mention the braggin rites among the other big names.

[Eric Stoner]

[ QUOTE ]


Every time you flip those cards over and you're a 60% fav...you played the hand correctly - even if you lose - you made the right play - took me a long time to get that in my head.

RB

[/ QUOTE ]

My head gets it, but my heart doesn't when I lose. It's a personal problem really... I need therapy, or more beer...

[restrikt]

It's easy for pros to take a 60/40 hand when they have a hug bankroll. For those of us with a smaller bankroll, we're essentially trying to get in the money, as opposed for outright winning the tournament. You can't be a top player unless losing the buy-in is meaningless to you.

[Jbrochu]

[ QUOTE ]
It's easy for pros to take a 60/40 hand when they have a hug bankroll. For those of us with a smaller bankroll, we're essentially trying to get in the money, as opposed for outright winning the tournament. You can't be a top player unless losing the buy-in is meaningless to you.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think it's a good idea to be playing any tournaments if you have to modify your strategy because the buy-in is significant to you.

[GBP04]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's easy for pros to take a 60/40 hand when they have a hug bankroll. For those of us with a smaller bankroll, we're essentially trying to get in the money, as opposed for outright winning the tournament. You can't be a top player unless losing the buy-in is meaningless to you.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think it's a good idea to be playing any tournaments if you have to modify your strategy because the buy-in is significant to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may not be a good idea economically.

[Spook]

What if you satalite in?

[Jihad]

He sells neked pictures of Annie Duke to other high limit players? Umm, really if you're implying that his theory is flawed I completely disagree with you and want to point out that he is quite well proven in all diciplines of poker, tournament and cash. Judging by his articles and his past studies that he has spoken of, I believe he is an excellent game theorist and his word should be believed until directly disproved. Also, wrong forum.

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
It's easy for pros to take a 60/40 hand when they have a hug bankroll. For those of us with a smaller bankroll, we're essentially trying to get in the money, as opposed for outright winning the tournament. You can't be a top player unless losing the buy-in is meaningless to you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you enter a tournament to just try and get into the money, then you have no business entering the tournament in the first place.

The 60/40 proposition should be just as easy for you to make, even if the buy-in is your case money, as it is for the pros who are worth millions. If it's not, then you made a very serious error. You should withdraw from the tournament and play in a game you can afford.

[Exitonly]

like everyone else said. 60% is pretty huge and is an easy call. If you're better than the rest of the field 55% is probably borderline. Depends on the structure and the field strength.

[elliot]

[ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

there is not a chance in hell you are a winning MTT player if you really think this.

[Mi_T_Sharp]

This post wouldn't even make it past the mods in MTT.

Man, I love this thread.

[T_Nasty]

[ QUOTE ]
From his CardPlayer article:
[ QUOTE ]
I answered a hypothetical question a while back that went something like this: Let’s say you are in the WSOP main event, and on the very first hand dealt, you have A-K offsuit in the big blind. Everyone folds to the small blind, who exposes his cards to you and goes all in with Q-J suited. Would you call?

You should — seriously. You would win the pot 60 percent of the time, meaning that six out of 10 times, you’d start the tournament with twice as many chips, while four times, you’d be out early and could enjoy the rest of the afternoon! That is too good an offer to pass up. You could justify folding as a 53 percent or even 55 percent favorite in this situation, but 60 percent is just too much equity for any mortal to give up.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is massively -EV in the long run. How does he make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's defintetly +EV, and even moreso for DN than for the rest of us. For a (winning) high stakes cash game player it would even be +EV to take a 50/50 on the first hand.