Chopping

[ACE2M]

Anyone got a decent formula for chopping tourneys?

e.g.

4 players remain and the structure is 1st 5600, 2nd 2900, 3rd 1800, 4th 1200

Chipstacks = 170,000, 160,000, 60,000, 45,000 with blinds at 2000/4000 no antes.

All good players.

[byronkincaid]

email Stars support and get them to do a chip count. insist repeatedly that whatever position you are in always gets a bit extra. go on tilt when they refuse and push all in every hand.

[totalise]

Anyone got a decent formula for chopping tourneys?

yes...

player A: anyone wanna chop?
you: no

that structure is mathematically perfect

another way is to issue the money via chip counts:

ie 4 players left... each of them is g'ted 1200 (because the worst they can do is finish 4th)... so total prize pool is 11,500... subtract the money g'teed to each (4800) which leaves 6,700, and then apportion that according to the chips

435,000 chips in play:

170k guy has 39.08%
160k guy has 36.78%
60k guy has 13.79%
45k guy has 10.34%


then just mulitply that with the remaining prize pool

6700*0.3908 = $2618.36
6700*0.3678 = $2464.26
6700* 0.1379 = $923.93
6700 * 0.1034 = $692.78

170k gets $1200+2618.36 = $3,818.36
160k gets $2464.26 + $1200 = $3,614.26
60k guy gets $1200 + $923.93 = $2123.93
45k guy gets $1200 + $692.78 =$1892.78

add it up to make sure it tallys, and its $11,500 (67cent difference due to rounding)

one of the main problems with this chop is that it gives more value to the big stack, but its not by a huge margin, and its difficult to get an accurate chip chop when theres 5 or 6 people in the deal.. so generally its good enough

Naturally the premise is that it assumes your chances of winning correlates to the amount of chips you have, ie 170k guy has 39% of the chips in play, so he should win 39% of the time. If all the players are of equal skill, then this will be accurate, but if you are a better player you will win more then 39% of the time, so should angle for more money, the same applies to when you are a short-stack.

[Sark79]

I thought this was going to be a cooking thread

[ACE2M]

Anyone got a decent formula for chopping tourneys?

yes...

player A: anyone wanna chop?
you: no

that structure is mathematically perfect

another way is to issue the money via chip counts:

ie 4 players left... each of them is g'ted 1200 (because the worst they can do is finish 4th)... so total prize pool is 11,500... subtract the money g'teed to each (4800) which leaves 6,700, and then apportion that according to the chips

435,000 chips in play:

170k guy has 39.08%
160k guy has 36.78%
60k guy has 13.79%
45k guy has 10.34%


then just mulitply that with the remaining prize pool

6700*0.3908 = $2618.36
6700*0.3678 = $2464.26
6700* 0.1379 = $923.93
6700 * 0.1034 = $692.78

170k gets $1200+2618.36 = $3,818.36
160k gets $2464.26 + $1200 = $3,614.26
60k guy gets $1200 + $923.93 = $2123.93
45k guy gets $1200 + $692.78 =$1892.78

add it up to make sure it tallys, and its $11,500 (67cent difference due to rounding)

one of the main problems with this chop is that it gives more value to the big stack, but its not by a huge margin, and its difficult to get an accurate chip chop when theres 5 or 6 people in the deal.. so generally its good enough

Naturally the premise is that it assumes your chances of winning correlates to the amount of chips you have, ie 170k guy has 39% of the chips in play, so he should win 39% of the time. If all the players are of equal skill, then this will be accurate, but if you are a better player you will win more then 39% of the time, so should angle for more money, the same applies to when you are a short-stack.

Thanks.

I forgot to include the £500 saver.

So £3200 - 1st and 2nd and £2000 - 3rd and 4th seems pretty reasonable.

[Sheriff Fatman]

In a heads up situation the 'mathematically correct' method is give each player 2nd place prize money and to use relative chip counts to apportion the balance between two players.  The theory is that the proportion of chips in play equates to the relative chances of the players winning.

The same method can be used for more players at the table, but the calculations quickly become complicated to the extent that they couldn't reasonably be done at the time.  For example, even with only 4 players, as in this case, calculating 3rd place probabilities gets pretty involved.  Adding more players gives an exponential increase in complexity.

Ultimately, it is possible to come up with a Probability Table of each players likely finish, after which its a simple method of applying the payouts to give an EV calculation, as below:

   A   B   C   D   Total
Chips   170,000   160,000   60,000   45,000   435,000
1st   39.08%   36.78%   13.80%   10.34%   100.00%
2nd   33.50%   33.73%   18.46%   14.31%   100.00%
3rd   20.26%   21.47%   32.19%   26.09%   100.00%
4th   7.16%   8.02%   35.55%   49.26%   100.00%
Total   100.00%   100.00%   100.00%   100.00%   
               
EV   £3,610.56   £3,520.53   £2,314.16   £2,054.75   £11,500

Totalise's method is the only realistic way of coming up with something which approximates this in a short space of time.  Comparing the numbers above with his figures you will see that they aren't a million miles out but that, as he stated, the approximation favours the big stacks.

Sheriff

[Snatiramas]

Please remember there is no perfect way to do this..........my prefered route is to get heads up and not try to do 4 way splits..............never suggest a split...........wait for others to show their ideas...........be prepared to say no........take into account whether you are going to play with these people again............ large number of runners and deals do not normally add up to a good deal

Hang on didn't I do a six way deal once..............ignore all of the above

[Snatiramas]

I thought this was going to be a cooking thread

In that case might I sugest a sharp knife

[TightEnd]

If you are the shortie in any multi way deal discussion don't be afraid to say no/play hardball and hold out for more than your share of the EV...just keep going on about how you are one double up away from threatening and you should be able to cut yourself something worth doing.

[Sheriff Fatman]

Or you could go for the Tighty solution which is to get all in pre-flop one hand before a deal is done with AQ vs AK, suck out, and ensure everyone deals with roughly even stacks!

Not that I'm bitter or anything!

 

Sheriff

[TightEnd]

Or you could go for the Tighty solution which is to get all in pre-flop one hand before a deal is done with AQ vs AK, suck out, and ensure everyone deals with roughly even stacks!

Not that I'm bitter or anything!

 

Sheriff

shortstacked with AQ I pushed, nothing to see here

[Karabiner]

If you are the shortstack when the deal is done, always remember that you should get more than the "pure" mathematical value of your chips. On the other hand if you are the chipleader you should be prepared to accept slightly less than the "pure" mathematical value. This is because I believe that there are some implied values that need taking into account.

IMHO of course.

[Sheriff Fatman]

shortstacked with AQ I pushed, nothing to see here

The push was fine (actually it was an all-in call).  It was the outcome I objected to!

However, my 'live cards' have since recovered the difference I'm sure!  

Sheriff

[TightEnd]

If you are the shortstack when the deal is done, always remember that you should get more than the "pure" mathematical value of your chips. On the other hand if you are the chipleader you should be prepared to accept slightly less than the "pure" mathematical value. This is because I believe that there are some implied values that need taking into account.

IMHO of course.

thats what I was trying to say, only you said it much more elegantly

[Graham C]

I can feel 50p coming on