Intresting proposal

[BirdieLongSocks]

First of all sorry for all spelling errors and grammer mistakes that will occur.

My friend made me the following proposal yesterday. We would play a texas holdem NL sit and go he would control 9 hands and I got 1 hand. Each hand has its own stack, so he would start with a total of 9 times more chips then me. The game would be played by me going all in every single hand to my advantage I got to see all of his hands and I got to pick which single one that I would race HU to the river.
He said he would pay me 5 times what I would bet on myself to win If we played 10 matches, no more no less.

I took upon his challange thinking that in the start I wold out kicker him and when he had fewer hands left I could afford some badluck.

So to the question, is the odds with me or against me?

[Siegmund]

Assuming you are going all-in preflop, your friend is going to get rich.

To win, you have to survive nine consecutive all-ins. A dominated-hand matchup like AK vs KQ is close to a 75% chance; pair over pair is close to 80%. The only time you will do better than that is when you're so lucky as to be dealt a pair AND catch an opponent with a third card of the same rank.

Winning nine 80% shots in a row is a 13.4% chance (6.4:1 against).Nine 75% shots in a row is a 7.5% chance (12.3:1 against.) If you succeed in busting out several of his hands, towards the end you will have a very small selection of opposing cards to choose from and be forced to take some 50% or worse shots. I would say a fair payoff to you for these rules is in the neighborhood of 20:1.


Your friend could give you an even more generous proposition -- "I'll deal you a hand. You choose any two cards you want from the rest of the deck for me to play." -- and I think he'd still be getting the best of it if he only offered you 5:1 to play nine hands in a row.

[Derek in NYC]

[ QUOTE ]
To win, you have to survive nine consecutive all-ins.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not correct. If he wins the first allin, he will have all chipstacks covered and can lose the next allin without going broke.

It is a very interesting proposition bet, and I dont know the answer. A more interesting question than the 5:1 odds your friend offered, is the following: "What odds must be offered before this bet is EV neutral?"

One initial problem that comes to mind is not so much the fact that you must win later allins, but you must win the first allin. You have a RH, but you can choose your RH against 9 others and choose the worse one of the 9 to play against (ideally one you dominate).

[FishHooks]

One minor question, you said you play 10 hands, but really your saying 9all in's just ten total hands on the board, of which one is yours, right? making sure i got this correct.

Sounds like a +EV bet on the surface to me.

[reubenf]

Not quite. As was already mentioned, he doesn't have to win 9 consecutive all-ins. Further, he should sometimes get better than a normal dominating hand since he knows as many as 16 mucked cards.

[BirdieLongSocks]

Well we played it 10 times and I won none.

Would you have taken this deal? To me it felt right.

[BirdieLongSocks]

If I win the first all in I will afford to lose 1 since I will have twice as much as the rest of the stacks.

[elitegimp]

[ QUOTE ]
Well we played it 10 times and I won none.

Would you have taken this deal? To me it felt right.

[/ QUOTE ]

what was the fewest hands you got him down to? Can you describe how long the typical match lasted? Something like "I won the first hand, lost the second, won the third, the lost the tourney when I lost to the same hand I lost to before"

[BirdieLongSocks]

I got him down to 2 hands twice.

The problem was in the begging 1st-5th hands(I busted out before 5 hands in 6 matches), after that phase it got intresting because some of his stacks was larger then the rest.

My strategy was to double up without busting any more of his hands, then I could afford more badluck when they got fewer. It did really have some intresting deep and I think my strategy could have been better, but as sudjested 5:1 is not good enought odds.

[housenuts]

i feel like running this simulation myself. i don't know if it's +ev but i think you should definitely win a few out of those 10

[Paul2432]

I think in general accepting proposition bets like this is not a good idea. Your friend presumably had time to study the bet and determine it was a profitable wager. Why else would he make the offer? All good proposition bets appear to be reasonable but in fact offer very poor odds.

Paul

[FishHooks]

Nice Icon, gotta love that booty lol

[FishHooks]

You would think this is +EV since you get to pick the best starting hand, and you get to pick which hands you go up against. As long as you know how to figure the percentages of which hands would be the best to go up against your fine. Assuming you survive the first couple all-ins which should be easy since you pick the hands you go up against.

[Roscoe]

I played this "game" six times, and won twice. The last game I didn't lose a hand (I did, however, have a push...I had a poor hand and fortunately there was a duplicate. Even though there was a hand I did have the advantage with, I would rather take the draw and try to get a better "upper hand" next time.)

I would be tempted to take the 5:1 odds.

[Derek in NYC]

Can we see a mathematical or symbolic logic proof from somebody on this?

[PygmyHero]

Old thread that I am bumping / reviving.

I thought this was an interesting prop when I first read about it and I finally got around to trying it today. I did not play 10 matches - I might later, but I was excited to write something about the first one.

I won in 13 hands. I actually got lucky on the first hand when I had the poorest starting hand at the table. After that I busted out the other stacks pretty quickly. I twice had a pair against an underpair and usually could pick a dominated hand (one I outkicked), especially in the beginning. Near the end I twice had to go up against a better hand (losing both times), but by then I had most of the chips so I could afford a few losses. I had a 4:1 chip advantage when it got heads up. I lost one and won the second. Overall I won 9 hands and lost 4.

I think most of this has already been said before but there are several strategic considerations:
1) go in against the dominated hand if there is one
2) if you don't have a favorable matchup go against the smallest stack you can
3) in addition to considering your odds of beating a hand, calculate your EV (it may be correct to reduce your chances of winning a single hand but having greater EV by taking on a larger stack. e.g. I would take a 60% shot at a stack of $200 over an 80% shot at a stack of $100 - this is about what it would be if you had a big pair and could go against a $100 stack with a small pair or a $200 stack with one overcard)
4) keep in mind the dead cards (in other hands) - this may change the answer to point 1

No offense to the OP, but are you sure you considered all of this and played 'correctly' (odds wise)? One other question - its not clear from your post...to 'win' the bet do you just have to win 1 out of 10 or do you have to win the majority, or does he pay you 5:1 when you win and you pay him 1 when he wins (in which case you need to win 2 matches to break even)?

Okay, I'm going to try this again later. I'll write in the results then.

BTW- almost forgot - you made no mention of blinds. I assume you didn't have any, and I used none in my game, but let me know.

[FishHooks]

You totally have this challeged all messed up lol.
Things you got confused on
1. You get to pick you starting hand
2. all stack sizes are the same
3 you just have to have chips after all hands are played

(by the way didn't even think about the dead cards, HUGE advantage to be able to see the hands so you know what hands are really live and which are drawing dead +++++EV)

I'd take this prop bet anyday

[PygmyHero]

I'm a little bit confused by your response. I thought I did everything in accord with what the OP said about the bet. As I said, one question I had was about whether or not blinds were used.

I set up 10 stacks of 100 chips to start. I high carded for the button and then dealt out ten hands. My hand moved all in and I chose one of the other 9 hands to call. I am not under the impression that I can choose my hand (2 cards from the deck), nor my opponents. I am taking the hand I am dealt and selecting an opponent from the other 9 dealt hands. I then played the rest of the hands in an identical matter (and moving the button of course).

Although the stack sizes BEGIN at the same amount, that is not true as the game moves on. After I win the first hand (or lose - but then its all over) I have twice as much as any stack meaning that if I lose the next hand the game is not over.

Maybe the OP can clarify for us.

[PygmyHero]

My 2nd simulation:

I won 10 out of 11 hands and had a 9:1 chip lead when it was HU. I was able to go in with a dominating hand 10 times, losing one of these. The other win was a pair (for me) versus two overs and the pair held up. In other words I was the favorite in every hand, often by a lot.

OP, if your friend will pay me 5:1 ask him when I can start doing this bet with him.

I'm not so much convinced its EV+ because I've won twice as because of the hand situations which come up (I've typically dominated the hand matchups in both simulations). I know, sample size too small...

[PygmyHero]

Okay, this will probably be my last post on this matter since it doesn't seem to interest many others.

I ran 10 simulations, winning 5 and losing 5.

Overall I played 94 hands, winning 63 of them, good for 67%. I lost 27 of them (29%), and split the other 4 (4%).

I twice lost on the first hand, once on the third hand (losing hands two and three), and the rest of the time I got heads up (losing twice HU).

I found it interesting that I got heads up 8 times. Three times I got HU with a 9:1 chip advantage 3 times, and I had a 4:1 chip advantage the other 4 times.

Some general observations:
I usually could dominate a hand, especially in the early going. As a result I won a disproportionate number of hands early.
HU was pretty much a crap shoot. I won about half the hands (as we would expect), and managed to twice lose with a 9:1 chip advantage.
It was very important to see the other hands at the table (as opposed to just picking any two cards from the deck to play against). For example, I had 55 and my best two choices for opponents were 65o and A5o. I opted to play against the A5o since another hand had a pair of aces (meaning the A5o has exactly 1 card to beat me - barring improbable straights, flushes, double paired boards, etc.). In contrast there were 3 live sixes. Thus I am better off playing against the A5o.

Anyway, I found this game very interesting.

[ThinkQuick]

[ QUOTE ]


To win, you have to survive nine consecutive all-ins. A dominated-hand matchup like AK vs KQ is close to a 75% chance; pair over pair is close to 80%. The only time you will do better than that is when you're so lucky as to be dealt a pair AND catch an opponent with a third card of the same rank.


[/ QUOTE ]


So what is the probability that your random hand is at least a 3:1 favorite over one of 9 random hands? of 8 random hands, of 7..?
how do we find out?

[wmspringer]

[ QUOTE ]
My strategy was to double up without busting any more of his hands, then I could afford more badluck when they got fewer. It did really have some intresting deep and I think my strategy could have been better, but as sudjested 5:1 is not good enought odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you attacking larger stacks, then? Other things being equal, I'd think I'd prefer to attack smaller stacks so as not to be busted if you lose.

[CieloAzor]

I was interested enough to go ahead and try it once this morning. I got to heads up with a 6:4 advantage and won on the first hand. From memory, I believe I won 9 hands, lost 3, split 1.

After losing to a 2-outer on hand 2, I was on the brink of elimination on hand 3. Another 2-outer sucked out on me, leaving me with 1 out for the re-suck. I rivered a split instead, which was a 2-outer in its own right. I didn't run into trouble again until it was 3-handed.

I'm not sure how you could lose this 10 times in a row. It seems easily +EV at 5:1.

[ThinkQuick]

[ QUOTE ]
Other things being equal, I'd think I'd prefer to attack smaller stacks so as not to be busted if you lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

The strategy in this game is far too serious for a simple computer simulation. We'll just have to wait 'till 10 000 2+2ers try this at home and post their results.

[CieloAzor]

I tried it once more, just because it's a somewhat entertaining way to play solitaire. Got to heads up as a 9:1 leader, lost twice, then closed it out on the 3rd hand. Two for two!

I actually won this one despite losing the 2nd hand again, and then dealing myself 34, 23, and 34 again, for 3 consecutive hands midgame. I sucked out on every one of them. There was another hand pretty early on where my suited J6 was a only a favorite against some 10-high hand, and a dog against almost all the others. I opted to face an unsuited J6 hand, and wait for higher EV plays later.

Interesting game.

[Guruman]

this prop intrigued me, so I played a few rounds (in my infinite boredom)

I'm 3 for 5 right now, and the two times I lost I went out on the first hand.

I played it with 5 chips per stack and a 1chip/ 2chip blind structure just to see the effect.

Having any kind of blind structure definately helps the player out, as he can target non-blind hands and take thier stack plus a chunk of all of the other stacks with each hand. Losing to a non-blind stack sucks because it disproportionatly increases the opposition stack size, but the expectation of having blinds is very positive overall for the player. I'm going to try a few rounds out now with no blinds, and see exactly how much harder that makes it to play.

[Guruman]

yup, no blinds makes this markedly more difficult to beat. If you propose this bet, keep the blinds down as small as possible or eliminate them completely.

[mosch]

SNG 1: I won in 10 hands. Poker is easy!
SNG 2: Lost on first hand. Poker is hard.
SNG 3: Lost on first hand, K8 v 83 with two dead 3s. Poker sucks.
requested and received new setup.
SNG 4: Lost on first hand, AJ v J9 with two dead 9s. Poker is RIGGED!
requested and granted a seat change.
SNG 5: Lost on 7th hand, 7 players remained.

[ThinkQuick]

SNG 1: Won in 13 hands
SNG 2: Lost after 4 in a row worst hands on the table with 4 remaining
SNG 3: Lost on first hand
SNG 4: Won in 10 hands
SNG 5: Won in 11 hands

[gergery]

Very interesting. Seems like a Markov chain could get at a decent answer.

I dealt this out and played 3 hands for grins, assuming no blinds.

I’d guess that for the first 3-4 opponents you might average a 75-25 advantage for each play, between getting in with dominating hands or picking overcards to undercards where undercards are missing outs.

So on first all-in you’ll lose 25% of the time. Second all-in where you survive, you’ll lose the next two a total of 4.6% (.75*.25*.25), run a couple more and maybe you get to ~35% total loss thru the first 4 or so trials.

The times you haven’t lost then (~65%), you’ll have about a stack of 4 with 6 opponents, and maybe a typical hand advantage of ~65-35% now. So you’ll go bust maybe 5% of the time (.65*.35*.35 * .3 or so you must fact that bigger stack) on each of the next 4 opponent ranges (4 left, 3 left, etc.). Then heads up, assuming you come in with a 8-2 or 9-1 advantage, you will lose 3 in a row (or equivalent amount) around 20% of the time (.5^3 + some lose-lose-win-lose type scenarios).

Add those up, and I get maybe 35+5+5+5+5+20 = 75% chance of losing in aggregate.

Since you need to win ~>20% over the very long run to be EV positive, I’d guess this prop bet is 1) very, very close, and 2) Perhaps slightly EV positive.

But my numbers are obviously extremely rough, and slight changes could make this easily a EV negative bet. In fact, I think 75-25 might be too optimistic an average over the first few trials, so there’s a good chance this is EV negative. And if your friend is smart, I’d say it probably is EV negative 

--Greg