|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
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 tournamentsI 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. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
[ 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). |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
0evg0:
My analysis neglected all other finishes other than 1sts which you should've noticed, he also said way more than 2x avg to win Also, I assumed we're talking about bigger tourneys than $25 here, that was merely an example. I just don't think anyone is way more than 2x avg to win in an MTT, sorry. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
brendan I am quite sure many 2+2ers in anything over a 1k field with a resonable structere will be over 2x avg to win. Esp a lag player who ITMs less frequently but ends up getting deep scores more frequently.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
[ QUOTE ]
0evg0: I just don't think anyone is way more than 2x avg to win in an MTT, sorry. [/ QUOTE ] I couldn't disagree more. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
war I am pretty sure I am >2x avg to win a 180 If someone has a sharkscope subby can you verify?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
Anyone that is winning way more than 2x avg is going to have an absurdly high ROI, do you not see that?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Apathy or unquenched desire?
I played baseball most of my life up until I started playing poker when I was 16. Playing a competitive sport where failing 70% of the time on offense was standard for good players helped me develop my "apathetic desire" for poker tournaments. It's probably different with most people who are used to excelling at a high level when being associated in regards to being "successful". It's not so much apathy or unquenched desire, but more both.
|
|
|