The old notion of passing up marginal +ev spots in tournaments...

[RobNottsUk]

[ QUOTE ]
Look up the article on flipping in tournaments by Matt Matros.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting article, but the author assumes that there is added value in having the big stack, if you add 10% to the stack size acheived with 0.538 probability you are going to skew the answer in favour of "flipping".

Against bad players who call too much and pay off, the value of a big stack is in riding beats, and the opportunity to play more speculative hands (but is this really worth 20% of the starting stack?). You´ld call in the BB with QQ, expecting frequently to see JJ..22 or AQ..A9, but do you really think calling against AKs is the TEV maximising decision against worse players?

462 x 1.1 = 508 cost BI´'s

538 profit, making + 30 BI´s per 1,000 tourneys.

Folding accepts accepts a hit of tc 50, out of stack 10,000.


But what is your TEV of the double up chip stack?

According to the article author, it´s not $20,000 but $22,000 to reflect a higher TEV and big stack benefits.

If it were a Winner Takes All, then clearly you take the shot, as there´s +ve TEV in the increased winning chances, each chip is worth the same.

But if you believe theory of multiple placings tournaments who calculate that each extra chip is actually worth less, due to the tourney pay out structure then you won´t agree with those article conclusions nor the working.

Flippers, as everyone in the long run is dealt the same cards, to profit in a tourney, you need to find some way of getting an edge, that is not dependant on "cards speak". If you were forced to flip every hand, it is obvious that you´ld be a losing player due to the entry fees in tourneys without added value.

Good spots do crop up against bad players, even in 8min blind level SnG´s online, the main beneficaries of flipping are the players who folded their hands, not those hoping to double up.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

Read or re-read the Harrington Books, as this is wrong on so many levels. In a large MTT if you are constantly seeking out coinflips early on, your hourly rate is likely to be zero. Those chips are not $$$, they are equity in the tournament. Virtually every pro uses a small ball game to accumulate chips, all the while attempting to trap a player on a huge hand.

But I think the biggest flaw in your logic is the fact that all your splashing around in very dangerous spots is not nearly as effective of a technique as becoming very aggressive when the blind stealing becomes worthwhile.

FWIW, I actually play your technique on FPP freerolls, etc. that aren't really worth my time. And the logic is: I want a hige stack early or go home early. The difference is I know its not optimal play, but I'd rather place no 500 out of 500 that 43 and win $11 for 3 hrs.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Read or re-read the Harrington Books, as this is wrong on so many levels. In a large MTT if you are constantly seeking out coinflips early on, your hourly rate is likely to be zero.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not about a fair coinflip. This is about getting your money in as a 6:5 or 4:3 favorite, either giving you a valuable early double up, or the chance to start another tournament.

[ QUOTE ]
Those chips are not $$$, they are equity in the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't assume that those who disagree are only making this trivial error.

I came to the 2+2 forums because I rediscovered the ICM. I posted some of the earliest hand analyses using the ICM in the STT forum. I have posted several original results about the ICM. Don't say I need to go read about the ICM.

You might normally accumulate chips playing beautiful, socially accepted small-ball poker. This does not imply that you should avoid a great opportunity to get your entire stack in as a significant favorite, while significantly decreasing the expected length of your tournament.

[El_Hombre_Grande]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Read or re-read the Harrington Books, as this is wrong on so many levels. In a large MTT if you are constantly seeking out coinflips early on, your hourly rate is likely to be zero.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is not about a fair coinflip. This is about getting your money in as a 6:5 or 4:3 favorite, either giving you a valuable early double up, or the chance to start another tournament.

[ QUOTE ]
Those chips are not $$$, they are equity in the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]
Please don't assume that those who disagree are only making this trivial error.

I came to the 2+2 forums because I rediscovered the ICM. I posted some of the earliest hand analyses using the ICM in the STT forum. I have posted several original results about the ICM. Don't say I need to go read about the ICM.

You might normally accumulate chips playing beautiful, socially accepted small-ball poker. This does not imply that you should avoid a great opportunity to get your entire stack in as a significant favorite, while significantly decreasing the expected length of your tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

I certainly wasn't speaking to you, or telling you to read anything. You can rest assured that none of my posts are directed to you. That being said, once you change the hypothetical to a situation in which we have a "significant" edge I would agree ---its time to put the chips in the middle if we can. But to me, there is a difference between "marginal" and your term "significant."

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look up the article on flipping in tournaments by Matt Matros.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting article, but the author assumes that there is added value in having the big stack, if you add 10% to the stack size acheived with 0.538 probability you are going to skew the answer in favour of "flipping".

[/ QUOTE ]
Jerrod Ankenman said, "... everyone realizes that you get to apply your super-duper skill to the second $10,000, too, right?" Do you not think the great player's skill is worth anything in the period between an early double up and a normal double up? This view would be unpopular and difficult to defend.

The smart question is how much more it is worth to double up early rather than to double up later. I believe Matt Matros overestimated the value slightly, but that is much better than assuming that you don't expect to accumulate chips after doubling up.

[ QUOTE ]

But what is your TEV of the double up chip stack?

According to the article author, it´s not $20,000 but $22,000 to reflect a higher TEV and big stack benefits.


[/ QUOTE ]
No. Reread the article. Both your interpretation of the units and the explanation are wrong.

Let's try to push the frontiers of research in the right direction.

[RobNottsUk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But what is your TEV of the double up chip stack?

According to the article author, it´s not $20,000 but $22,000 to reflect a higher TEV and big stack benefits.


[/ QUOTE ]
No. Reread the article. Both your interpretation of the units and the explanation are wrong.

Let's try to push the frontiers of research in the right direction.

[/ QUOTE ]
Glossing over the authors argument, which is based on a "Winner Takes All" philosophy, rather than the true consequences of multi-payout MTT is a far greater inaccuracy.

As early on the value of stacks closer reflects their $ approximation, I think it´s fair to use the authors $22,000 figure in that way.

The true EV of flipping in that spot is 3% of stack due to cost of BI to next tourney when you bust out.

So the real question is whether your TEV is doubled by winning a flip, or whether it´s increased by less, or improved even more as that article author suggested.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
As early on the value of stacks closer reflects their $ approximation, I think it´s fair to use the authors $22,000 figure in that way.

[/ QUOTE ]
It can be misleading when you are talking about someone with a high ROI, and when you are discussing the value of being able to enter another tournament. T20,000 now is worth much more than $20,000 to a great player. That's obvious, and not the subject of the discussion.

Matros suggested that T20,000 now is worth about the same as T22,000 later, at the time when the player normally doubles up or busts out. The advantage of a great player comes from winning chips over time. Doubling up now, instead of several levels from now, gives you more time to accumulate chips.

[ QUOTE ]
The true EV of flipping in that spot is 3% of stack due to cost of BI to next tourney when you bust out.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no idea how you got that figure. It disagrees with other calculations. I also don't know which of the several possible meanings of EV you are using.