Shorty35
04-01-2005, 09:31 PM
The general sentiment of this board is, under normal tournament circumstances, to take advantage of any edge - even a small one.
But does the necessary edge to risk all of your chips change as the tournament progresses? Or as your stack size increases?
For example: If you "knew" that you could be in 3 55%/45% (you are favored) races in a row, would you take it? (I am assuming there there is no fold equity in this situation - villans hypothetical cards are face up)
Would the analysis change if each time you were up against a stack equal to yours rather than progressively and proportionately smaller stacks, as would be the case on the first three hands of tourney?
What if you were in the top 5% in stack size and were around the bubble? Would you be more inclined to take it (and potentially build a massive stack), less inclined to take it (and preserve an already significant advantage) or neutral (+ ev plays are independent of stack size).
And would the necessary edge that you are looking for change as a function of either stack size or stage of the tourney?
But does the necessary edge to risk all of your chips change as the tournament progresses? Or as your stack size increases?
For example: If you "knew" that you could be in 3 55%/45% (you are favored) races in a row, would you take it? (I am assuming there there is no fold equity in this situation - villans hypothetical cards are face up)
Would the analysis change if each time you were up against a stack equal to yours rather than progressively and proportionately smaller stacks, as would be the case on the first three hands of tourney?
What if you were in the top 5% in stack size and were around the bubble? Would you be more inclined to take it (and potentially build a massive stack), less inclined to take it (and preserve an already significant advantage) or neutral (+ ev plays are independent of stack size).
And would the necessary edge that you are looking for change as a function of either stack size or stage of the tourney?