Quote: First off, you're not a coin flip -- you only put five opponents in with you, but you'll actually have 9. You're probably only about 33%. Second, you have a monster stack relative to blinds, you can probably find better spots to try and build your stack -- where you will be 3-1 or 4-1 favorite. Third, having a deep stack early is less useful, since you can't bully your way into the money (too many opponents) and don't really want to play for all your chips against another big stack.
I think going all in here is not the play.
This has been done to death, but mathematically speaking, this is wrong, imho.
1) you are 33%, but 33% to win 10X your stack. This is clearly way better EV than coinflipping to double up. It's also WAY better EV than being a 4:1 favorite to double up.
The math speaks against you. Let's assume you are so good, you always get it in as a 4:1 favorite. Assume 10000 starting stacks.
If you call here, you have 100000, with a 67% chance of busting.
If you get it in as a 4:1 favorite 3 times in a row, each time vs. a similar sized stack, you will have 80000 51% of the time, and a cumulative 48.8% chance of busting.
...And this is with the preposterous assumption that you get cards good enough to gaurantee these situations (and are so good at poker that you'll never get all in with KK vs. AA, etc).
If we said that you always got your chips in with a 3:1 edge, which by the way would make you the best tournament poker player in the world by a huge margin, you would still need to get it all in the middle 4 times in a row (each time vs. an equal stack) to equal this TEV, and you would still bust 68% of the time.
oh man, Ive heard this argument soooo many times ... its like poker's version of discussing religion and politics...That said, LET ME OPINE. The 28,394,398x I have heard this debate have brought me to TWO concluions about this subject:
1. The strict math of the situation is of diminished importance given the weight of gambler's ruin in tournament play. Afterall, you can steal, steal, steal, without even having to grasp desperately to your +ev pf hand match-ups. Anytime you are risking your entire stack with 60%> to win the hand is seriously gambooooling your tournament life~ imho.
That said, the monumental improvement to your stack will GREATLY increase any GOOD tournament players TOURNAMENT value exponentially. We are talking- like what? 9 blocks increase in the first round? That gives a talented player a HUGE edge over the field. They have roughly 96K excess chips to use toward gambles and plays- while everyone else has 3k TOPS. This means they gamblers' ruin becomes a NON-ISSUE for a a good sized window...THAT'S POWER in a tournament. A good player is going to make the money if they win this first hand unless some crazy voo-doo [censored] occurs.
An aside to those discussing this: Im curious, if you feel it is correct to fold/call here- do you act the same in a $100 buy in tournament?
I would call- btw; especially at the WSOP ME- where I potentially stand to win a life changing amount of $ and am up against a tougher playing field- I'm movin on up any chance I get- FOR SURE.
#2 Im convinced that, in MOST cases- a player who instafolds here may be too weak/tight to ever do very well in tournaments. Eventually you are forced to "coinflip" (though that is not really correct) your tournament life. If your not willing to do it when you are getting 8 to 1 for your $...when are you willing to do so?
...I know, I know...SSNL is not the appropriate forum.