pergesu
09-06-2005, 09:16 PM
"Someone pushes and turns up their hand on level 1. What's the minimum advantage you need to call?"
This is a question that Bones just posed to me, and we've been discussing a bit for the past few minutes. My initial idea is pretty simple - the probability of you losing can be no more than your over all probability of making the money. For example, if I've played 10k SNGs and find that I have an ITM of 40%, I'd be a fool to take any bet that has me losing more than 40% of the time.
You have to determine how the extra chips affect your chances of making the money. I think the effect is inversely related to your skill edge over the field. If you're significantly better than the field, then having twice the chips early on doesn't help you nearly as much as if you're only marginally better than the field.
Continuing with the example of a 40% ITM player who plays low stakes SNGs, the minimum edge he should be willing to take is probably around 57/43. I don't know exact numbers (and I'm very interested in studying this further), but I'd say that if I double up on the first hand I probably increase my chances of making ITM by around 10% (10% of 40 is 4...40+4...my chances are a tad less than that). So if my opponent shows a hand where I'll lose 43% or more of the time, I should fold. As an example, if he has AKo I should call with TT+, but fold anything else.
If your edge over the field is smaller, it's correct to take greater risks if that will significantly increase your edge. Some of you may groan at this, but I think Gigabet's infamous Q3o hand is an extreme example that illustrates this point well. Though he's a great player, every other player at the $15k buyin knows what they're doing, and he probably doesn't have that much of an edge over them. This changes entirely when he gets twice the chips. His general skill + big stack skill + the fact that he can't bust on a single hand allows him to pick up more pots, and over all have a significant advantage over the field.
Keep in mind that this is all relative to the rest of the players at your table. Of course Gigabet is a better player than me...but I probably have a greater edge over the table at low limit SNGs than he does at the ultra high stakes games. Fortunately if you're playing on Party, you have a good idea of where you stand compared to the general population at your limit.
The basic idea to take away from this is that when you're faced with an early all-in decision, you need to estimate your edge should you win the hand, and take the bet only if that figure is greater than your probability of losing the hand.
This would be interesting to study because it's not a simple matter of finishing in the money, because of the different weights of finishing 1/2/3. ITM is simply a benchmark to use as the starting point for this idea, and hopefully I can expand on it.
This is a question that Bones just posed to me, and we've been discussing a bit for the past few minutes. My initial idea is pretty simple - the probability of you losing can be no more than your over all probability of making the money. For example, if I've played 10k SNGs and find that I have an ITM of 40%, I'd be a fool to take any bet that has me losing more than 40% of the time.
You have to determine how the extra chips affect your chances of making the money. I think the effect is inversely related to your skill edge over the field. If you're significantly better than the field, then having twice the chips early on doesn't help you nearly as much as if you're only marginally better than the field.
Continuing with the example of a 40% ITM player who plays low stakes SNGs, the minimum edge he should be willing to take is probably around 57/43. I don't know exact numbers (and I'm very interested in studying this further), but I'd say that if I double up on the first hand I probably increase my chances of making ITM by around 10% (10% of 40 is 4...40+4...my chances are a tad less than that). So if my opponent shows a hand where I'll lose 43% or more of the time, I should fold. As an example, if he has AKo I should call with TT+, but fold anything else.
If your edge over the field is smaller, it's correct to take greater risks if that will significantly increase your edge. Some of you may groan at this, but I think Gigabet's infamous Q3o hand is an extreme example that illustrates this point well. Though he's a great player, every other player at the $15k buyin knows what they're doing, and he probably doesn't have that much of an edge over them. This changes entirely when he gets twice the chips. His general skill + big stack skill + the fact that he can't bust on a single hand allows him to pick up more pots, and over all have a significant advantage over the field.
Keep in mind that this is all relative to the rest of the players at your table. Of course Gigabet is a better player than me...but I probably have a greater edge over the table at low limit SNGs than he does at the ultra high stakes games. Fortunately if you're playing on Party, you have a good idea of where you stand compared to the general population at your limit.
The basic idea to take away from this is that when you're faced with an early all-in decision, you need to estimate your edge should you win the hand, and take the bet only if that figure is greater than your probability of losing the hand.
This would be interesting to study because it's not a simple matter of finishing in the money, because of the different weights of finishing 1/2/3. ITM is simply a benchmark to use as the starting point for this idea, and hopefully I can expand on it.