On expectation in a tourney

[bernie]

not sure how to word this, but it's been buggin me for awhile.

how does one go bout figuring if entering a given tourney is a +EV venture? ive always considered entering tourneys a losing proposition, but is it?

first with all things being equal (players skill, blinds accelerate every 20 mins) say you it's a $100 buy in. knowing nothing more, how much return would you have to expect on average for it to be worthwhile to play?

many times, just making the final table doesnt pay enough for the time spent. you usually have to finish in the top 3. so the side games are usually much more profitable, IMO

what are the other factors to consider?

btw...i think blinds going up every 20mins adds a very high luck factor. even higher depending on one's # starting chips. but that seems to be the normal deal around here.

thanks in advance...

b

[Nottom]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
first with all things being equal (players skill, blinds accelerate every 20 mins) ... blah blah blah

[/ QUOTE ]

If you aren't better than the field then there is no point in entering unless you just want to gamble.

[bernie]

im using monetary assessment as a starting point. in some tourney structures, it doesnt matter how good you are, it can still be a crapshoot.

for instance, if it was a winner take all, with $100 buy in, and 100 players enter. and it only pays 1st place, all things being equal, wouldnt you want to get at leat $10,000 for winning? wouldnt that be an even return for youre buyin? youre getting paid 100-1 on your entry fee.

so expand off of that, since tourneys dont pay out that way. finding a starting point, and THEN considering the field. i think there should be a way to figure the monetary payout in relation to your buy in before you look at the field. And then use the field to adjust your EV up or down from there.

make sense?

told ya i wasnt sure how to ask it...

b