WSOP Hand History

[mrsnake3695]

Let me make another analogy:
Here is the bet:

Your entire current net worth, plus a vow of poverty for the rest of your life vs. twice your current net worth. One coin flip. Deal?

I think you would be foolish to take the bet for several reasons:

1. You are precluded from ever gaining anything ever again. You can't lose, then go out and make a fortune again from scratch.

2. There are other ways to double your current net worth that are both fairly reliable and much safer, it will just take longer.

3. Your current net worth may be low in relation to what it might be in the future. In other words, over the course of your life it may be possible for your MORE than double your net worth. But if you lose this coin flip you lose all that potential future gain. Yes, I understand that it's just "potential" gain, and that you might lose all you worth in a terrible disaster the next day whether you take the bet or not. You might also lose everything in a terrible disaster after you win the bet too.

This is the exact situation we are in, except our "life" here is out tournament life. We are getting 2:1 on our money, one trial. But no one can argue that this is a good gamble, can they?

I don't think this fits at all in the discussion. First of it's not a 50/50 coin flip we are talking about. Perhaps if you say you'll flip a coin 3 times and it lands heads once you double your money would closer fit this situation.

Secondly, in your analogy you talk about you can still double your worth but it will take longer. That is true, but at the same time if you double your worth now you can still keep accumulating more. In fact it would be easier to accumulate more since you now have money to invest ext. So the doubling of your money would be worth more than double in the long term. The same applies in our poker scenerio. With double the chips in the tourney, we can play more aagresivly if we want and others will be less apt to try risky bluffs against u. You get more than just 10,000 more chips when it's twice anyone else.

]

 

[hott_estelle]

I seem to be missing the point? I've got no response. How you could possibly construe this a some kind of bankroll issue is beyond me....

I get the analogy AG, and I think it definitely fits explaining the situation; but then again, we seem to be the only ones that agree on the fold in this situation. Oh, and I'm sorry I havn't been around to help you out in defending the fold (and an easy fold at that). Been so busy with things here in NY.

Anyways, I'll go back and look at the posts that have been going on in this thread, and make another post of mine soon.

 

[edge-t]

"Your entire current net worth, plus a vow of poverty for the rest of your life vs. twice your current net worth. One coin flip. Deal?"

The beyond your bankroll statement was aimed at this. If you're going to take a vow of poverty after this 65/35 situation, isn't it suggesting that the player(in this wsop instance) is playing way out of his bankroll(not you, sorry, didn't phrase it correctly )? Again, we're talking long term.

Anyway, I think we'll never come to a conclusion on this.It's simply a difference in opinions.

 

[mrsnake3695]

I get the analogy AG, and I think it definitely fits explaining the situation; but then again, we seem to be the only ones that agree on the fold in this situation.


So u think a 50% chanceto lose for all the money you have or could have is the same as a 35% chance to lose your buy-in?????

I'm sorry but this is a real stretch. It's not your entire life, it's a poker tournament.

I would love to get some input from some name pros, not to see what they would do nesessarily but what should the average player do.

 

[aliengenius]

"Your entire current net worth, plus a vow of poverty for the rest of your life vs. twice your current net worth. One coin flip. Deal?"

The beyond your bankroll statement was aimed at this. If you're going to take a vow of poverty after this 65/35 situation, isn't it suggesting that the player(in this WSOP instance) is playing way out of his bankroll(not you, sorry, didn't phrase it correctly )? Again, we're talking long term.

Anyway, I think we'll never come to a conclusion on this.It's simply a difference in opinions.

It's an analogy. It has nothing to do with our actual overall bankroll. Pretend we are the world's wealthiest person, we make way more than Sheldon Adleson's one million dollars an hour. The $10k buy in is meaningless to us. In fact the $12 million first prize is meaningless to us overall in life. We just want to win the tournament in this case; say our long term goal is to be know as the greatest poker player ever. We want all of Phil Helmuth's records and more: most bracelets, most cashes, highest ROI. etc.

Now look at the risk vs. reward here: 35% chance to go bust and it will be impossible to win, vs. double the starting stack, which increases our chance to win by...? Well, I don't have the statistical or mathematical background to give you a percentage, but I suspect it is much much lower than you think. Certainly not double. It is not like we are not down to four handed at the final table where you have a chance to eliminate two of the remaining players.

I understand that the tournament does not get played in a vacuum, and I think that is a big part of some of the pros' argument in FPs link: that they have to consider their true "real life" potential the earn as well (they can get +EV elsewhere, like cash games). I'm not trying to say that we would be broke if we lose this tournament; I am trying to say the we are broke as far as the potential to make anything in this specific tournaments 35% of the time.

 

[aliengenius]

I get the analogy AG, and I think it definitely fits explaining the situation; but then again, we seem to be the only ones that agree on the fold in this situation.


So u think a 50% chanceto lose for all the money you have or could have is the same as a 35% chance to lose your buy-in?????

I'm sorry but this is a real stretch. It's not your entire life, it's a poker tournament.

I would love to get some input from some name pros, not to see what they would do nesessarily but what should the average player do.

I hope I explained it above. Again, it was an analogy, it has nothing to do with our actual bankroll, or our overall situation in life. It's our "tournament" bankroll, not our "real life" one; it's our tournament life, not our real life. Our only goal is to win the tournament (or at very least to cash-- not for the money, just to say we are the greatest ever).

 

[hott_estelle]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^EDIT: AG, you need to edit previous post, or the quote at least, it says its all posted by me, but its not. Only the first portion is, most of the quote is from snake, he must have misused the quotes. It makes it seem like I said that, when I didn't.

So u think a 50% chanceto lose for all the money you have or could have is the same as a 35% chance to lose your buy-in?????

I'm sorry but this is a real stretch. It's not your entire life, it's a poker tournament.

Please go look up the work analogy before you go on about criticizing my post or AG's post.

If you want to still criticize the analogy, after you look up that word and understand the meaning, then by all means go ahead. You have a right to your own opinion. But from the looks of it, you don't seem to understand what an analogy is at the moment.

 

[Ronaldadio]

I`m for calling.

The two main reasons for me to call are simple:-

1. A random hand v AK makes me more than a 50/50 fav.
2. I`m not a good enough player to be giving away chances like this.

If you think about it, you are then in a position to upset the pros - they won`t want to gamble their chips preflop unless they have AA - u could constantly overbet preflop, say "be ready to put all your chips in regardless what the flop shows" and they will think long and hard before they committ.

What was it Sam Farha said "sometimes to live you have got to be prepared to die" ?????

 

[aliengenius]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^EDIT: AG, you need to edit previous post, or the quote at least, it says its all posted by me, but its not. Only the first portion is, most of the quote is from snake, he must have misused the quotes. It makes it seem like I said that, when I didn't.

Just to be clear:

Originally Posted by hott_estelle
I get the analogy AG, and I think it definitely fits explaining the situation; but then again, we seem to be the only ones that agree on the fold in this situation.

MrsNakes

So u think a 50% chanceto lose for all the money you have or could have is the same as a 35% chance to lose your buy-in?????

I'm sorry but this is a real stretch. It's not your entire life, it's a poker tournament.

I would love to get some input from some name pros, not to see what they would do nesessarily but what should the average player do.

Perhaps a mod can fix above and delete this post?

 

[mrsnake3695]

Why I'm saying it doesn't fit is because you said it was a coin flip on if you double your money or go broke. The poker scenerio is not a coin flip, you are the favorite. That in itself is a huge difference. Trying to compare a 50/50 coin flip to a situation where you are 65/35 favorite is not a proper comparison no matter what you name it.

You also don't factor in that if you double your money it adds more potential to add even more money above the doubling with "extra" money to play with. This would be for both the "life" scenerio and the poker one.

I certainly understand people saying they wouldn't call and I'm not in any way saying you are wrong just that I look at it differently.

 

[aliengenius]

Why I'm saying it doesn't fit is because you said it was a coin flip on if you double your money or go broke. The poker scenerio is not a coin flip, you are the favorite. That in itself is a huge difference. Trying to compare a 50/50 coin flip to a situation where you are 65/35 favorite is not a proper comparison no matter what you name it.

Sorry if the analogy was a bit unclear: you are getting 2:1 in money on an event that has an even chance either way (double your net worth, so at the end you would have three times what you started with).

This is exactly the same as getting 2:1 on the event trial, but only for even money (the situation the the tournament, you will double up).

Exactly the same mathematically.

 

[AcesorKings]

Some amusing argumentation in this thread.

 

[hott_estelle]

Some amusing argumentation in this thread.

Which side is amusing?

 

[aliengenius]

This is amusing:

Me: "So, I just want to make a logical argument: all poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles"

FP: "Yes, but according to the American Kennel Association, you are talking about a "toy" poodle, not an actual poodle as defined by them."

Me: "True, although I am more interested in arguing the overall point."

PosterA: "Your logic doesn't make any sense. Poodles are animals."

PosterB: "I like cats!"

Me:

 

[F Paulsson]

Me:

 

[Ronaldadio]

Something that can`t be denied...

If, prior to seeing the poll result, I could have guessed who out of the CC regulars would have called and who would have folded, I would have been very close!!!

Read into that what you want

 

[aliengenius]

This is the longest HA thread ever, ship it to the archive.

this^ apparently discussion has pretty much ended...