Re: ??
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For the purposes of the discussion you can assume all players have equal talent.
[/ QUOTE ]
If all players have equal skill than the expectation of 100 chips stack is, well, $100 and not $150 nor $50. Trust me - I just played in a World Series of Flipaments (refer to some recent threads in MTT Community for more on that...). HOWEVER article speaks of a GOOD player's stack being worth MORE than face value at the outset and it STRESSES as the MAIN POINT that doubling the stack CANNOT effectively double the EV of the said stack FOR GIVEN PLAYER. I daresay that the fact that the increased initial value of the stack is DUE to the SKILL of the player...
Do you now see why your statement is in contradiction to the main argument of David's article?
[/ QUOTE ]
No.
David is proving what he said and you quoted.
No one, certainly not I, am claiming that a players skill doesn't change the value of his STACK.
In fact the first two sentences of the paragragh you quoted say just that:
[ QUOTE ]
Bullying is a tatic. Correctly using it, and other tatics, will increase a players chances of winning, and hence the value of his stack.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again. The issue is the value of the individual chips in the stack, not the value of the stack. And to simplify that discussion I assert you can assume all players have equal talent. Especially since Snyder has asserted the opposite of conventional wisdom.
David's article went beyond that but the underlying issue which is causing the discussion is whether chips won are worth more than chips already held. David not only proved that but that they aren't worth more in a skilled players stack either.
|