Something very important i want to have a discussion about..

[Bob T.]

The part I don't like is that you are taking the maniac away from a game where he has a serious disadvantage to a game where he probably only is at a slight disadvantage. I like dismantling maniacs, by having position on them in a full ring game, but most of the time now, the best situation that you can get is having position on them in a six max game. Playing headsup with a maniac, probably takes away much of your advantage, and maybe even swings it into the maniacs favor.

If I was convinced that I was a much better headsup player than the maniac, 5% is the absolute maximum that I would risk in one SNG. Actually as I am writing this, I think that 5% is a little bit more than what I would risk, but I don't have a lot of gamble in me.

[Mike Jett]

[ QUOTE ]
The part I don't like is that you are taking the maniac away from a game where he has a serious disadvantage to a game where he probably only is at a slight disadvantage. I like dismantling maniacs, by having position on them in a full ring game, but most of the time now, the best situation that you can get is having position on them in a six max game. Playing headsup with a maniac, probably takes away much of your advantage, and maybe even swings it into the maniacs favor.

If I was convinced that I was a much better headsup player than the maniac, 5% is the absolute maximum that I would risk in one SNG. Actually as I am writing this, I think that 5% is a little bit more than what I would risk, but I don't have a lot of gamble in me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good answer.

And fwiw, he wasnt as lagtarded when the table started filling up...which is the reason i was willing to go elsewhere with him to begin with.

I have a feeling he was going to leave and wanted to challenge me anyways.

But what happened happened. My roll is also higher than 2k now after clearing that bonus. I'd rather not share exactly how much, but i'll say that running hot is so fun.

[Rolf_GBG]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is exactly how much gamble do you think a good professional needs in him, while balancing himself against a risk of ruin or a high variance situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Take a look at the Kelly criterion, it's a formula to find the optimal bet size given your bankroll and odds. It's no universal truth, but it might be something like what you are looking for.

According to KC, to wager 5% of your bankroll, you need to be a 5% favorite. (Well, a little more than that to pay for the rake/fee.)

If it sounds a little risky, remember that KC assumes you adjust your bankroll every time you bet, moving down in limit as you lose.

I suppose the most difficult part would be calculating your odds at heads up. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion

[Ignignokt]

In my experience, the guys who make HU challenges to strangers want to compare dick size because they feel over their heads where they are. That's about it.

And HU is so attractive to the maniac because a good player's edge is significantly reduced vs. a maniac's style. Thus, the maniac sees good results from HU play, and fancies himself better at HU than at multiplayer tables, so when he feels threatened he'll pull out the HU challenge.

In short, if you "have a little gamble in you" to the point where you want to accept those kind of challenges, you should accompany that with maniac-specific HU skills. Read up on your game theory, and look at the recent threads on this subject in the HU forum.

[debater]

I think applying Kelly criterion to this kind of situation makes sense.

However, I do not believe betting "full" Kelly is wise. I was a Blackjack player in another life, and most of the vterans who made their living in that game would tell you to use a small fraction of Kelly. Perhaps as little as 1/10th or as much as 1/4th Kelly at most if you are relying on this for your livelihood. So if you have a 5% edge, then these pros would advise betting somewhere between .5% of your bankroll ($10) and 1.25% ($25). (go to BJ21.com, the 2+2 of the Blackjack world for in depth coverage of this concept)

Applying Kelly to Poker seems to require a little adjustment as well. Another person mentioned the rake, and I think this requires you to make an adjustment to a NET edge that solves for this.

Additionally, I think the concept of edge in Poker is very difficult to ascertain. It changes with your mood, your freshness, his mood, his freshness etc. etc. etc. Also you went from playing a game that you identified an advantage in, and then went to a game where that was less clear. I am sure you understand that HU is fundamentally different from even shorthanded play. So he may have been someone that prefers that, and thus his maniac style more suited to HU.

I think you should be willing to "take a shot". But, I would not recommend going from a ring game where you have a clear advantage to game sufficiently different, that your advantage is unclear. If you do it, I would advise doing it for no more than $25.....which I know seems low......but, you are a professional, and variance can hurt more than most of us know and then only after it is too late.

Good cards to you...

Debater

[Hobbs.]

There is a decent possibility that unless you play a fair amount of HU or SH LHE, this maniac might have had the edge in this HU match. Maniacs are often harder to beat HU then TAGs that play mainly full handed or 6 handed....

[TripleH68]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a decent possibility that unless you play a fair amount of HU or SH LHE, this maniac might have had the edge in this HU match. Maniacs are often harder to beat HU then TAGs that play mainly full handed or 6 handed....

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was hinting toward.
Why play his game if you feel nervous/worried about it?

[Mike Jett]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a decent possibility that unless you play a fair amount of HU or SH LHE, this maniac might have had the edge in this HU match. Maniacs are often harder to beat HU then TAGs that play mainly full handed or 6 handed....

[/ QUOTE ]

We started the table heads up.

This led to what happened.

[Mike Jett]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a decent possibility that unless you play a fair amount of HU or SH LHE, this maniac might have had the edge in this HU match. Maniacs are often harder to beat HU then TAGs that play mainly full handed or 6 handed....

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was hinting toward.
Why play his game if you feel nervous/worried about it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasnt. I made the offer after he wanted to play me more heads up on a 5/10 table.

[James.]

gamblers make money playing "their" game. you deviated from "your" game. don't forget the greatest EV comes from that which produces the best EV.