Is inflection point the new EV?

[slickpoppa]

Inflection point is gradually replacing EV as the most overused term on 2+2

[MLG]

agreed, and most people are trying to apply it in places it just doesnt belong.

[schwza]

i also agree, except that i think that EV's constant use is justified.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
except that i think that EV's constant use is justified.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but ome people use it in ridiculous contexts. I remember one guy bragging about hwo sticking his copy of SSHE down the back of his pants during a long poker session was +EV for his back.

[burningyen]

"Block" is giving "inflection point" a run for its money.

[PrayingMantis]

Yes, something strange is happening to this and the STT forum. The interesting thing, IMO, is that there's a real difference between the cash-games EV and tournament EV, and up until now all the models (like ICM) didn't really capture it, only (maybe) some parts of it. So even if most of the people around here are using these "new" terms in a very wrong way, maybe it's the first time tournament poker really takes a different route and is starting to get its own unique theoretic language, which is very different, and should be different, from that of the cash-games.

[hurlyburly]

I'd rather see more Shania.

[djg40]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd rather see more Shania.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm with him.

[Beavis68]

Using the inflection point with proper pot equity in +EV.

[LearnedfromTV]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, something strange is happening to this and the STT forum. The interesting thing, IMO, is that there's a real difference between the cash-games EV and tournament EV, and up until now all the models (like ICM) didn't really capture it, only (maybe) some parts of it. So even if most of the people around here are using these "new" terms in a very wrong way, maybe it's the first time tournament poker really takes a different route and is starting to get its own unique theoretic language, which is very different, and should be different, from that of the cash-games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having only seen the "inflection point" reference in HOH I and having not yet read HOH II, I can't say if the different ways the term is being thrown around in various threads is appropriate given Harrington's definition. But every serious post I've seen with 'inflection point' in it raised interesting questions about tournament theory, usually relating to the relative values of different stack sizes and the influence of those values on decision making at key points in a tournament. It seems these are questions worth asking; perhaps our vocabulary will refine itself as the ideas become clarified.