The 1k sngs....an interetsing observation?

[FieryJustice]

the thing is that these "friends" will talk about the chop in AIM and not even transfer money sometimes...just let the other guy win next time they get hu.

[Michael C.]

Fiery- You're right, and there's a whole bunch of collusion that none of the sites can really stop, since people can do anything via AIM. But at least Stars making a rule would cut it down. I'm sure there are some people who are perfectly honorable and wouldn't resort to blatent cheating who think agreeing to always chop with each other is OK.

[Shillx]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, let's say player X and I always do a chip chop if we wind up HU together. No forced agreement, we just both like to chop. Is that kosher or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

In and of itself, no. But if you play in such a way (before it gets HU) that increases your combined equity then yes. And imo you should at least look into the prospect of foul play by people who auto-chop when they get HU. That is the only reason why I don't like the idea of a chopping option in SNGs. Of course it is always possible to chop behind the scenes but Stars shouldn't facilitate it imo.

[Pudge714]

A big difference between STT's and MTT's is the probabality of it affecting the outcome. In an MTT how often will people with piece sharing end up HU? In an STT?

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
A big difference between STT's and MTT's is the probabality of it affecting the outcome. In an MTT how often will people with piece sharing end up HU? In an STT?

[/ QUOTE ]

To mitigate this, you can just open up a few more STT windows and that should straighten everything out.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im sure there is fairly blatant collusion that goes on in any high stakes sngs...I remember a sng a while back on pokerxfactor where johnnybax got hu with someone...sheets, if i remember right, where he said they agree to always chop when they get hu or something and they made sure to get all in on first hand once hu. Welcome to pokerstars.

[/ QUOTE ]

im not sure your example is at all immoral, since they are the only 2 involved since the only ppl losing EV are doing so willingly. Its basically like playing a flippament as long as they played it straight until 2 handed.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL it's terrible, imagine the extra EV they could earn for each other by colluding, there would be automatic benefit to both, as they always chop HU. Not saying they do, just that it sounds very shady.

Mack

[DCJ311]

[ QUOTE ]


Run around like a scared chicken? wtf are you talking about. My claim is that it is possible to achieve a 10% roi at the 1k sngs on stars. Maybe I missed something in econ class, but roi stands for return on investment, meaning in a 1100 total buy in sng it would be possible to make 110 per tournament. Now why the hell would rakeback not be included in this return on investment....? Your comments that "not all people have the same rakeback etc etc" are stupid bc everyone does have the same rakeback on stars (at least all the supernova players, and if you play 1k sngs you will be a supernova player extremely fast). Your comment that all people will not use the FPP points on the same thing is also stupid, because if someone dislikes money enough to not maximize ev thats not my problem and does not affect my "roi" (and from now on I will use the term "roi" as it is intended to be used, return on investment, and since rakeback is a return on my original investment I will include it unless otherwise specified).

When I said I would bet on a 5% roi, is because I am completely sure that I will personally have a 5% roi in a month or so (by sharkscopes standards, which is not true roi bc it does not include rakeback). Most likely it will be higher than that, but I only bet on things that are a lock (like the Bears beating arizona by 12.5 on monday night...) But whatever, you can call me a scared chicken, despite the fact that I will bet you your roll that I will squash the stars sngs. And thats really all thats important.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, how did I not come across this post sooner. I like the under 10% ROI for you over the next 4000 1ks for $25,000 or less, including rakeback. I don't even need to see poker stats or even disclose my opinion of you as a sng player, the only thing that is relevant is that you were actually on Chicago pt. spread in this game.

[TheNoodleMan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Run around like a scared chicken? wtf are you talking about. My claim is that it is possible to achieve a 10% roi at the 1k sngs on stars. Maybe I missed something in econ class, but roi stands for return on investment, meaning in a 1100 total buy in sng it would be possible to make 110 per tournament. Now why the hell would rakeback not be included in this return on investment....? Your comments that "not all people have the same rakeback etc etc" are stupid bc everyone does have the same rakeback on stars (at least all the supernova players, and if you play 1k sngs you will be a supernova player extremely fast). Your comment that all people will not use the FPP points on the same thing is also stupid, because if someone dislikes money enough to not maximize ev thats not my problem and does not affect my "roi" (and from now on I will use the term "roi" as it is intended to be used, return on investment, and since rakeback is a return on my original investment I will include it unless otherwise specified).

When I said I would bet on a 5% roi, is because I am completely sure that I will personally have a 5% roi in a month or so (by sharkscopes standards, which is not true roi bc it does not include rakeback). Most likely it will be higher than that, but I only bet on things that are a lock (like the Bears beating arizona by 12.5 on monday night...) But whatever, you can call me a scared chicken, despite the fact that I will bet you your roll that I will squash the stars sngs. And thats really all thats important.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, how did I not come across this post sooner. I like the under 10% ROI for you over the next 4000 1ks for $25,000 or less, including rakeback. I don't even need to see poker stats or even disclose my opinion of you as a sng player, the only thing that is relevant is that you were actually on Chicago pt. spread in this game.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, because when Joe posted that 2 days after the game, he was being completely serious.

[DCJ311]

dang I overlooked this- I retract my offer then, thanks for catching it in time!!

[Melchiades]

So, for some reason I remembered this thread. I only read this forum randomly now so I'm curious, does it look like anyone is beating the 1050's for 10%+?