#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Nath, The article mentions going allin as a 54% favorite, not a dog. Also, after skimming the article still am not really impressed by the numbers. In most tournaments I think a good player is more than 59% to double up and way more than 2x avg to win. In general I think almost all of these ideas of gambling for a stack are silly, especially in a tourney like the stars mill. [/ QUOTE ] O RLY? Just as an example, from the $27.5 buy-in $25k Gtd. on Stars: Entrants: 1347 1st place: $7169 Avg person should win: 1/1347=.07% Your theoretical win %: .14% Assume 15% ITM, any cash not a win is the first cash of $50.51 .15*50.51+.0014*7169-22=17.61 17.61/22=80% ROI This is not even accounting for all other FTs, etc., so me-thinks you haven't thought this through FWIW, not that anyone cares, I'm on nath and shaun's side here. I apply somewhat similar strategies with sports sometimes where if my future EV earning potential is better served by taking a slight -EV gamble now, the overall EV of the move is positive. Situations like these arise in things like tournaments because of the finite nature of things in that we have a certain period (before someone else does it) where we have to accumulate as much as possible (all the chips). [/ QUOTE ] i read this a bunch of times and all i can come up with is that you feel you poked holes in dan's hypothesis because you'd need an ROI well above 80% to win 2x as often. if that is correct, i imagine when dan is referring to a good player, he means someone who has an roi of like 125%+ at a $25 online mtt. which, correct me if i'm wrong because i'm extremely rusty with mtt stuff, is pretty reasonable for any typical mtt grinder pro |
|
|