Markups

[aaron1867]

I don't understand what you are saying? I haven't singled out Alex?

[pleno1]

I've gotten pretty ticked off with the mark-ups people are charging lately - but I don't mind at all, I just but in single comps when i fancy a punt or "feel" someone might win anyways so I just buy less. 1.3 is now the "stnd" for live comps, when last year 1.2 was everyone's default Mark-up, with it only increasing in special circumstances, every selling for WSOP events now at 1.3 and 1.35, not saying people are bad value, just saying it can't really be GREAT value in most circumstances.

for the last 12 months I've had a policy of "no mark-up" I don't ever sell at mark up, even the main event and the $5k 6m plo (my specialst event) I've sold at spot. I've stopped selling action on blonde because I can't sell action at spot to people who would charge me a mark-up, which is a shame cos i liked having blonde sweats but that's what it is.

I feel like if people really believed in the mark-ups they were charging they'd sell less action. If you're ROI in the main is 300% (like people are suggesting) then you make $30k by entering, so if clicking the reg btn meant $30k equity I'd be working as hard as i could to ensure I had as much action as possible, as it only happens once a year.

im with you brother

[Simon Galloway]

Can save anyone the trouble of listening to half an hour of Sheets.....

[stato_1]

I don't understand what you are saying? I haven't singled out Alex?

oops, you were referring to Alex who posted before, and typod "is" instead of "it" and I misinterpreted your post, realised now. Apologies

I do think there is an element of that yes.

[WotRTheChances]

I remember a friend who was the same table as Lee Watkinson, the year he ft'ed. He had 4x average at the bubble and when it went down to 10ish to go to the money he just shoved blind EVERY hand. And never got called.

There isn't another tournament you could do that.

fwiw i'm sure you could do it in most tournaments.... but it'd still be an awful idea. Seems unlikely he actually did this? Just waiting for mr X on your table with 2x avg to wake up with TT+ and take half your stack...

[stato_1]

I've given up basically. The way I'm approaching it is too long winded and I can't think of another. Stumbled across this though which is pretty interesting:

http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/WSOP2011.pdf

[The Camel]

I remember a friend who was the same table as Lee Watkinson, the year he ft'ed. He had 4x average at the bubble and when it went down to 10ish to go to the money he just shoved blind EVERY hand. And never got called.

There isn't another tournament you could do that.

fwiw i'm sure you could do it in most tournaments.... but it'd still be an awful idea. Seems unlikely he actually did this? Just waiting for mr X on your table with 2x avg to wake up with TT+ and take half your stack...

He did, I was railing my friend through to the $$$.

A guy open folded KK. My friend folded QQ.

[celtic]

I potentially would even be open or that of I want to become a big buyer again as the money I lose from sell at 1.0 is made up by the amount of packages I would buy at spot.

What does flushy think about this as an active 1.3+er?

1.0 for mod people on blonde WOULD be a good thing, tokay, woodsey, titty, myself, honey badger  a whoever likes to punt mainly because of the sweat and community run good.

If there was a general acceptance that everybody sells at 1.0 and most people who sell buy often too then cool Lego.

In my circle of friends we never sell at markup to each other and we never will either. We sell at a similar frequency and we buy at a similar frequency.

Lego.

To be honest, if was buying in someone one who's true value is say 1.3, I would be very uncomfortable buying at 1.0, just because I'm a mod.

I don't really see why it has to change. No one is forced to buy or sell on blonde, or anywhere for that matter.

I've missed a few pages of tis thread, so apologies if this has already been said.

[aaron1867]

I potentially would even be open or that of I want to become a big buyer again as the money I lose from sell at 1.0 is made up by the amount of packages I would buy at spot.

What does flushy think about this as an active 1.3+er?

1.0 for mod people on blonde WOULD be a good thing, tokay, woodsey, titty, myself, honey badger  a whoever likes to punt mainly because of the sweat and community run good.

If there was a general acceptance that everybody sells at 1.0 and most people who sell buy often too then cool Lego.

In my circle of friends we never sell at markup to each other and we never will either. We sell at a similar frequency and we buy at a similar frequency.

Lego.

To be honest, if was buying in someone one who's true value is say 1.3, I would be very uncomfortable buying at 1.0, just because I'm a mod.

I don't really see why it has to change. No one is forced to buy or sell on blonde, or anywhere for that matter.

I've missed a few pages of tis thread, so apologies if this has already been said.

Do you feel uncomfortable when buying shopping that's on offer? Seems same?

I only buy in players who have undersold or about right with MU, now you make me feel slighty bad....

[celtic]

I potentially would even be open or that of I want to become a big buyer again as the money I lose from sell at 1.0 is made up by the amount of packages I would buy at spot.

What does flushy think about this as an active 1.3+er?

1.0 for mod people on blonde WOULD be a good thing, tokay, woodsey, titty, myself, honey badger  a whoever likes to punt mainly because of the sweat and community run good.

If there was a general acceptance that everybody sells at 1.0 and most people who sell buy often too then cool Lego.

In my circle of friends we never sell at markup to each other and we never will either. We sell at a similar frequency and we buy at a similar frequency.

Lego.

To be honest, if was buying in someone one who's true value is say 1.3, I would be very uncomfortable buying at 1.0, just because I'm a mod.

I don't really see why it has to change. No one is forced to buy or sell on blonde, or anywhere for that matter.

I've missed a few pages of tis thread, so apologies if this has already been said.

Do you feel uncomfortable when buying shopping that's on offer? Seems same?

I only buy in players who have undersold or about right with MU, now you make me feel slighty bad....

I don't feel bad buying things that are on offer, but I would feel bad buying the same thing as you, for a cheaper price, just because some loonies think I'm fit to mod the forum.

[celtic]

And what stop me buying on behalf of someone? Seems ridiculous.

[Marky147]

this is a must listen for everyone in this thread

It is sheets (eric haber) on the 2+2 pokercast talking staking, and he balances both sides of the discussion really well

Starts 2hrs 12 mins in - lasts for circa 30 mins

Can someone put a link up please?  Thanks

http://pokercast.twoplustwo.com/listen_and_browse.php?episode=271

thought I had - sorry

Cheers for that Guy, interesting listen.

[LonOhRay]

Clear to me how it works but I hear the maths and makeup mark ups everyday, see if what I say helps anyone's way of thinking

10000 runner main event or any event ROIs are going to be bigger than a GUKPT timbuktu 100 runner as the amount of buyins one person can win in that tournament is a great deal higher than in the 100 runner. Yet you can only lose a maximum of 1 buyin.

However the variance is going to be much more severe in the 10000 as the percentage of the prize pool is locked up in 1st 2nd 3rd place is so high in both tournaments.

Yet reaching the top 3 in a 100 runner is a lot easier and happens a lot more often due to the field size than the 10000 runner.

You can reach the top 3 in 100 runner as much as you can the top 300 of the 10000 but you can't win the same percentage of the prize pool in the top 300 of the 10000 than that of the top 3 of the 100.


Therefore if you were to play millions of times you would be winning the 10000 a great deal less than the 100 and your overall winnings and roi are affected by how many top you get, not by how many min cashes you can crawl into. The extreme scale of the main event makes the variance much higher




The above could be completely wrong I'm v tired and had a few beers and haven't proof read it, I will tomorrow and if it's wrong delete it to avoid confusion

[The Camel]

Clear to me how it works but I hear the maths and makeup mark ups everyday, see if what I say helps anyone's way of thinking

10000 runner main event or any event ROIs are going to be bigger than a GUKPT timbuktu 100 runner as the amount of buyins one person can win in that tournament is a great deal higher than in the 100 runner. Yet you can only lose a maximum of 1 buyin.

However the variance is going to be much more severe in the 10000 as the percentage of the prize pool is locked up in 1st 2nd 3rd place is so high in both tournaments.

Yet reaching the top 3 in a 100 runner is a lot easier and happens a lot more often due to the field size than the 10000 runner.

You can reach the top 3 in 100 runner as much as you can the top 300 of the 10000 but you can't win the same percentage of the prize pool in the top 300 of the 10000 than that of the top 3 of the 100.


Therefore if you were to play millions of times you would be winning the 10000 a great deal less than the 100 and your overall winnings and roi are affected by how many top you get, not by how many min cashes you can crawl into. The extreme scale of the main event makes the variance much higher




The above could be completely wrong I'm v tired and had a few beers and haven't proof read it, I will tomorrow and if it's wrong delete it to avoid confusion

Well obviously a player is far far less likely to get a top 3 finish in the WSOP main event than win a GUKPT even is his edge is far smaller.

But no one has explained my point.

I believe you are FAR more likely to win a prize of 25x your buyin in the WSOP ME than win a GUKPT.

Why doesn't that mean there's less variance?

[SuuPRlim]

because Keith there is a mugh higher possibility of losing your buyin in the main event than in the 100 runner GUKPT, variance isn't about how much you can win, it's about how likely you are to lose. It's fair to say more often than not your main event result will be -$10,000.

Ofc when you do make the money you'll often make quite a lot of it, which is why it's such a good tournament.