[MicroBob]

(Haven't read Snyder's book)


I'm not sure that analyzing so in-depth in a heads-up scenario should lead us to so many conclusions regarding the value of re-buys in a multi-player field.
However, I'm not intelligent enough to know why so I readily pass the baton to those who are smarter than I am.

But I was kind of surprised to see Mason use the 60/40 example here as being more closely related to pay-out structures in an MTT.

While it's true that the difference between 1st vs 2nd is often not too huge (you'll be pretty happy if you get either) I think about the rest of the tournament pay-out structure including the bottom pay-outs where you pretty much get back your entry-fee if you limp your way into the money.

I thought that most agreed that it is best to play with a 'win at all costs' type mentality because it's higher EV than just playing a weaker game designed to barely get you into the top 10% to make it into the money.


If we assume that it's best to 'play for the win' then wouldn't we also assume something closer to a 100/0 type of structure for these little heads-up coin-flip type demonstrations?


In other words, to simulate an MTT-type pay-out structure in this coin-flipping exercise I don't know why we would look at JUST the difference between 1st vs 2nd.

I would think we should look at the difference between a 1st OR 2nd place finish compared with a 99th or 100th place finish.
And with that perspective, wouldn't a 100/0 pay-out structure apply to the heads-up coin-flipping exercise?


Perhaps there's something from the exercise that I'm missing.