Theoretical questions for discussion

Let's say you're a top level tournament player, like Hellmuth or Cloutier, playing in the big event in the WSOP. First hand you look down and see AdAs; what do you do in these two situations and why, and what would you need to see in the hand to play it differently.


A. You are the BB and all 9 players ahead of you go all in.


B. You've put 1000TC into the pot when an unknown player pushes all-in, and flips over 67c before you decide(you would be heads-up).


In situation A, I think you fold,(remember, you're one of the best in the world, and your aces are only going to win about 30% of the time). It's too early in the tournament to go against that many, even with AA. I'd think no more than 2 allins against to call.


For situation B, realize the 67c will win almost 25% of the time against AdAs; do you really want to give an unknown entity a 1 in 4 chance to take you out immediately just to double through? I'd have to say no. Mind you, if that's me, considering Phil and TJ might possibly be a little bit better than me, I call here. Probably in situation A too.

Daliman,


In both these situations you should move in. If you get busted, there are plenty of live action games you can make your money back at Binions or Bellagio. You'll have the whole week to do it.


You are no where near the money. So, you should play your normal game. I'm sure Sklansky would play his whole stack in both situations. The advantages of winning outweigh the risks of losing. If you are afraid of losing your entry fee, you should not be playing. I think it's even worse if you play so tight and miss making the chance of getting any money.


Last night I played a super satellite with a $150 entry fee. We are down to the last two tables. The top two places are guaranteed money, but usually they split it up between more. I've got $9,700 in chips and post the big blind for $1000. Loose early position player makes it $2500 and everyone folds to me. I look at my cards and I've got AsAd, so I move in the rest of my chips. He thinks about it, and calls me with KsJd. I'm a 6-to-1 favorite to win. Well, a king comes on the flop and a jack on the river.


The whole point of this is not to tell you a bad beat story, but to tell you that I had great odds, and winning this pot would have put me in a position to make the money. So, when you have a great opportunity, you don't pass it up. You have to play. You can easily get unlucky with one player too.


Good Luck


Mark

Pro or not - folding in any of these situations would be a huge mistake and it's not close. (Only exception might be situation A if you know that someone else holds the other two aces)


If you define a top player as someone who is 4 times as likely to win as the average player, in an event with 1024 startes, this would mean that an edge of 57:43 for risking your stack to double up is enough to maintain your advantage over the field as


0.57^ld(1024) = 0.57^10 = 1/256 = 4 * 1/1024.


cu


Ignatius

Helmuth and Cloutier give up any edge they might have over the field by going all in on first hand-it's purely luck. Situation A is easy fold for me - you are guaranteed to place at least 3rd, as after first hand, everyone else is knocked out except 1 or 2 players (if they hold same cards).

> it's purely luck


Sure it's luck - that's why we use probablilities to quantify the luck-aspect involved. The point of my calculation was exactly do demonstrate that the edge in both situations is much greater than any skill advantage possibly can be. What else would make a great player great if not the ability to recognize those situations and take advantage of them.


> you are guaranteed to place at least 3rd, as after first hand, everyone else is knocked out except 1 or 2 players


Daliman's post assumes the first hand in the "big-one", not a single-table tourney, so any tactics involving the pay-out structure should not be applicable here.


cu


Ignatius

your calculations more clearly for the more daft of us in the audience?

Scroll down to the "Sympathy for the Devil" thread or follow the link below. In the post I tried to explain my reasoning why even a pro-player like Phil Hellmuth is correct to call an all-in bet at the WSOP when he is "merely" a 3:2 favorite.


cu


Ignatius