|
|
#1
05-23-2007, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
who\'s more likely to win the main event?
the greatest tourney NL player in the world who has perfect memory and who knows the exact tendencies of every entrant in the main event, because he's watched each of them play every hand of poker their whole lives
or a complete beginner at poker who knows nothing about hold em or poker except the hand rankings, who has magic glasses and can see everyone's hole cards. he has an average learning curve. his first hand in the main event is his first hand ever. 
|
|
#6
05-24-2007, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: who\'s more likely to win the main event?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Once he knows that stuff he can't lose unless he gets outdrawn. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] He could easily limit risk by not putting all his chips in when he knows he's against a draw and instead just valuebet and then if it comes out shutdown. Though once the blinds start getting big it would probably be unavoidable to have to hold against a draw.
|
|
#7
05-24-2007, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: who\'s more likely to win the main event?
The pro.
Edit: the tougher the players, the more likely the pro wins. Against tourists, glasses has the edge. Edit, redux: [ QUOTE ] One of the greatest poker players who’s ever lived was named Stuey Unger [sp]. Unger was the only man to win the World Series of Poker three times. During his relatively short life (he died in his early forties) he entered thirty poker tournaments and won twelve of them. Even Tiger Woods doesn’t have a win ratio that high. One of the most famous stories about Unger occurred at the now demolished Aladdin Hotel in Las Vegas. Unger was playing Texas Hold ‘em in the card room, and realized he was being cheated by a peek. Unger didn’t see the peek; he just knew that one was in use, because his opponents were dropping out whenever Unger had strong cards. Rather than leave the game, Unger decided to play on. He knew he was being peeked, but decided that he was a strong enough player to still beat his opponents. When the night was over, Unger had won. While this is not a strategy I would recommend, it does show that even with an edge, the cheater can still get beaten by a superior player. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#8
05-24-2007, 04:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: who\'s more likely to win the main event?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Once he knows that stuff he can't lose unless he gets outdrawn. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] He could easily limit risk by not putting all his chips in when he knows he's against a draw and instead just valuebet and then if it comes out shutdown. Though once the blinds start getting big it would probably be unavoidable to have to hold against a draw. [/ QUOTE ] yeah...about him being a complete beginner... I'll take the expert by a very, very slim margin. First off, OP said that magic glasses is a complete beginner. Even if he sees his opponent's holdings, there are certain odds that he simply can't calculate due to his inexperience. We know that he could get out of jams, say his opponent outdraws him on the river in a non-allin situation, and minimize his losses. However, his mathematical misplay on earlier streets would bring this scenario up too often for his play to be anywhere near optimal. Change the condition from "complete beginner" to "average SSNL player" and the edge provided by the glasses clearly trumps any perfect-read player. We are underestimating the gap between your realistic world class player and the hypothetical player that OP is describing. A perfect memory and a perfect grasp of all of his opponents tendencies entails perfect hand reading (minus deceptive "play-Q3-like-it's-AA") and is something that no player could ever come close to. Simply put, it's an edge that we cannot fully appreciate because there is no way a human will ever come close to perfection in some of the gray areas in NL. If there was a perfect NL player, he'd probably have from 6-9 levels of thought at his disposal. Remember...his reads will be correct ALL the time. Other world class players will change gears and employ deception, but PNLP knows exactly how and when wcp will do so. No loopholes in sight (and none in the ether either).
|
|
#9
05-25-2007, 08:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: who\'s more likely to win the main event?
[ QUOTE ]
One of the greatest poker players who’s ever lived was named Stuey Unger [sp]. Unger was the only man to win the World Series of Poker three times. During his relatively short life (he died in his early forties) he entered thirty poker tournaments and won twelve of them. Even Tiger Woods doesn’t have a win ratio that high. One of the most famous stories about Unger occurred at the now demolished Aladdin Hotel in Las Vegas. Unger was playing Texas Hold ‘em in the card room, and realized he was being cheated by a peek. Unger didn’t see the peek; he just knew that one was in use, because his opponents were dropping out whenever Unger had strong cards. Rather than leave the game, Unger decided to play on. He knew he was being peeked, but decided that he was a strong enough player to still beat his opponents. When the night was over, Unger had won. While this is not a strategy I would recommend, it does show that even with an edge, the cheater can still get beaten by a superior player. [/ QUOTE ] The same anekdote is told about Ungar in the game Gin Rummy: "One story Ungar recalled was when a known cheater at gin called to set up a match with him. Ungar knew the man was a cheater as well but agreed to play him for money anyway. During the match, Ungar's bodyguard (sent by his financial backers because in those days the backers of a losing player at times assaulted or killed a winning player and took their money back) noticed the man was cheating. The bodyguard pulled Ungar aside and was irate while telling him. Ungar calmly told the bodyguard, "I know he's cheating. Don't worry. I'll beat him anyway", before doing so." (From Wikipedia) I would doubt whether the same anekdote holds true for poker as well.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
