blonde poker forum

Hand analysis board type post this, but not about any specific hand so I put it here.


You play an STT, you've payed your money and sat down. It cost you $33 to enter, but you win an average of $40 for each one you play.

Your seat is worth $40 to you as the first hand is dealt. Or $40 is your expected return from this tournament.

On that hand, you fold, but one player knocks another out.

There are now eight players instead of nine, the top 3 pay.

As the second hand is dealt, what is your seat worth to you?

higher!

Same?

 :D

I'm looking for numbers

In a winner takes all tourny your seat would be worth the same.
However in a structured payout such as an Stt your seat value would increase due to the number of entrants falling because it is not a mandatory requirement for your chip stack to increase in order to profit in this game. Hence you could come second with only 1 chip. Therefore when a player is knocked out, although u havent gained chips, u have gained monetary equity.

7/33*100*8/7= 24.24%

Ur expected ROI increases from 21.21% to 24.24%. Therefore ur seat is worth $41

Using ICM I get $40.69.

I havent got a clue, but I bet you have worked it out before asking.....and being a scot, you will have worked it out to the penny. :-*

Dubai, are you Scottish??

I haven't worked it out already, never used ICM

I see Rob Sherwood is reading this thread. He loves these questions :)

I'll give you $5 for it.

Using standard 50/30/20% payout and 1500 starting chips I worked out how many starting chips a player with a return of $30 would need to have to get a return of $40 (2160 chips). I then knocked one player out and gave another 3000 and got the answer $40.69.

In addition to a straight ICM do you not have to do apply a discount factor for the fact that someone has doubled up therefore your chances of winning the 50% for first are ever so slightly less than they were pre-hand one? In effect therefore you have to re-weight the three payout spots

This will have the effect of slightly reducing your expected return

   time for a maths  ;popcorn;

Not quite sure what you are getting at Tighty, but I think your chances of winning 1st place would slighlty increase too. Are you implying the opposite?

I'm playing devils advocate but what I am trying to say is that whilst your chances of Cashing have risen with one fewer runner your chances of winning may be ever so slightly lower due to you having half the chips of the doubler-up

Possibly.

Either that or I am very tired and exceedingly stupid

I fear the latter.

You always have to win 13,500 chips in Andrew's model to win.

It is easier to do this offa 7 players than 8.

 ;djinn; ;surrender;

(reminds me I need to replace my desk chair, .....current market value a fiver)

As ICM is just about the best approximation we have to EV in SNG's, Andrew T's answer is the mathematical correct answer given we have a perfect model and the said double up person is of average ability and the person who is knocked out is also of average abiltiy.

If all things were equal in these situations and we didn't have an edge generally a double up like this dumps .3% of the prize pool(about a dollarthis case) to the 7 people still on the starting chips and the rest to the double upee about 9%.

Of course we gain less in this case as some of our edge is built in to this double up happening, hence the reason why good SNG player play tight early on, as its mathematically correct.

Brilliant poll.

Got me really thinking.

I voted 0.25 - 0.50 but I do think Andrew T's method of calculating it makes a lot of sense.

i agree with tighty on this one. Surely you have to subtract from the original number due to the fact another player has double up. And in reverse you would add a small (maybe even a fair bit) % if you had doubled up. Your percentage must decrease if it was not you who doubled up as statistically that player now has twice ,or at least a fairly large increased, chance of winning as he can afford to lose 1500 chips once and still be left with his starting chips! My way was more logical than mathematical so i expect lots of criticism!

 Ks KingPoker Ks

I might be missing something, but as you rate the seat as worth $40 for your average winnings, presumably over a load of games, then it doesn't really matter as you have calculated that whether you get bad-beat out in the next hand, or you win it, the seat's worth $40.

In a winner takes all competition, someone doubling up on the first hand would not affect your equity at all.

The reason for the increase in equity here is because there are prizes for second and third. Whilst someone doubling up does hurt you slightly, it is more than compensated by the fact that someone got knocked out, which moves you closer to the money.

The easiest way to see this is true is to imagine that there is a nine-way all-in on the first hand involving all the other players, and eight are knocked out.

Still want to sell me your seat for $40?

Consider the following two models. Discount for now 2nds and 3rds. (and jokes about considering models)


Two players left13,500 in play
You 1,500 chips
Player X 12,000 chips.

Blinds 25/50



Nine player left 13,500 in play
You 1,500 chips
Player S 1,500 chips
Player T 1,500 chips
Player U 1,500 chips
Player V 1,500 chips
Player W 1,500 chips
Player X 1,500 chips
Player Y 1,500 chips
Player Z 1,500 chips

Blinds 25/50


In both models you have 1,500 chips, and 12,000 chips are elsewhere. In both models the blinds are 25/50. In which do you feel you would more likely to come 1st?