OT: Deal in WCOOP #2 HU

[yellowjack]

The two remaining players in the WCOOP #2 stopped play HU to arrange a deal. The two players are rambo and lunoid.

1st is $365,218.75 and 2nd is $205,646.25. However, when a deal is made there needs to be at least $30,000 left to play for. The total in play is $540865.

Lee Jones throws out these numbers:

Lee Jones [PokerRoom Manager]: Lunoid: $226,116
Lee Jones [PokerRoom Manager]: Rambo: $314,749
Lee Jones [PokerRoom Manager]: $30K in the middle

I could really use some help figuring this out. I decided to post this here since we all already know the ICM so the steps are easy to follow.

The chip counts are

rambo: t9,462,239
lunoid: t1,775,261

To calculate, I went here and plugged numbers in.

$365,218.75 / ($365,218.75 + $205,646.25) = 0.63976
Plug 0.63976 into Payout - 1st

$205,646.25 / ($365,218.75 + $205,646.25) = 0.36024
Plug 0.36024 into Payout - 2nd

Change 3rd to payout 0

Stack Sizes: 9462239 and 1775261

Yield $EV Values: 0.5956 and 0.4044

rambo's $EV is $540865 * 0.5956 = $322139.19
lunoid's $EV is $540865 * 0.4044 = $218725.81

According to the calculator, rambo got stiffed a bit by Lee Jones' proposition. What gives?

[runner4life7]

because if you are taking a deal with that kind of chip lead you are probably going to be taking a slight loss in ev otherwise you wouldnt be taking a deal.

[Wolfram]

[ QUOTE ]
because if you are taking a deal with that kind of chip lead you are probably going to be taking a slight loss in ev otherwise you wouldnt be taking a deal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry but this sentence doesn't make any sense. You're assuming that "taking a deal" means that you have to give something up that is rightfully yours. "Taking a deal" just means that you find a mutually acceptable way to resolve a situation. The deal can favor either party or it can be an equitable deal where the value for each party is as close as possible to an even conclusion. ICM was designed to calculate the $ worth of tournament chip stacks for fairer dealmaking. I have no idea why Lee Jones proposal differs from ICM. Maybe he's using a different algorithm.

[runner4life7]

sorry i should have been more clear. The only way "i" would take a deal with these stacks heads up is if i thought i sucked and therefore should be willing to take a hit. not saying this was Lee's idea, but that its why I would think first should get less if he is interested in a deal.

[ymu]

Isn't it affected by the fact that there's 30k in the middle and the 5.6:1 chip leader has a much better chance of winning it?

According to ICM, 84.2% of the 30k (ie nearly 25k) is the chip leaders. It looks like he got quite a good deal to me - assuming he wanted a deal.

[[Phill]]

They dont use ICM, they use cEV if memory serves.

This was went into a few weeks back when 3 handed the CL managed to get a deal where he could go on to win the 30K or whatever left over and make more than if he didnt deal and took 1st normally.

This would be better served in the MTTC forum, but yeah, general concensus is that the way they work out deal figures is no where near accurate.

[ManChild]

if Lee Jones offered a deal to the short stack which would guarentee him less money than 2nd place would it wouldnt make any sense.... therefore i think the way they do it, is each player is guarenteed 2nd place money (if there were say 5 people left then each would be guarenteed 5th place money) and then the remaining $$$ is chipchopped

MC

[eurythmech]

The thing is, the proposition was bad, but Rambo went for 290k vs 250k, leaving 30.8k - I can't understand it...

[Lee Jones]

Hi folks -
Yes, the algorithm that we use for computing N-way deals is this:

1. Remove Nth place money for each player, since they're all guaranteed that much.

2. Divide the rest by the percentage of chips that each player has.

Example: Anne, Bob, Charles are left. Anne has 50% of the chips, Bob has 30%, Charles has 20%. Prizes are $1000 for 3rd, $1500 for 2nd, $2200 for 1st. Total prize money remaining equals $1000+1500+2200 = $4700. First, remove (3 x $1000) = $3000. That leaves $1700. Anne's share = $1000 + (.50 x $1700) = $1850. Bob's share = $1000 + (.30 x $1700) = $1510. Charles' share = $1000 + (.2 x $1700) = $1340.

Note that if we leave some to play for, we remove that first, at the same time we remove the Nth place guarantee for everybody.

Now, is this a good way to do it? It has the advantage of being easily understood, simple to compute, and an industry standard.

It has some downsides, too, but remember, we don't force this (or any other) deal on the players. They are welcome to use ICM, star-gazing, or any other method they wish to arrive (or not arrive) at a deal.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

[zabt]

If I've been playing for a bunch of hours and make it heads up and both second and first place will be a significant amount of money to me, I can easily see making a deal that is a few % off from ideal. Either I'm tired and I don't realize the few % "error" or I'm tired and I'm just relieved to have it settled rather than having to sweat it out for a while longer.

Or, maybe I simply don't understand what it's like to get to heads up in an event with this much money on the line and am talking crazy....