Do you make this call here?

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you make this play every SnG for the rest of your life your ITM is capped at ~33%.

Brad 5:18

[/ QUOTE ]
Fortunately you're not put in this position every SNG for the rest of your life.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is making this decision once any different?

[/ QUOTE ]
It wouldn't, because you should be making any decision as if it's a repeatable event.

But as I've been thinking about this, I'd like you to explain how this caps your ITM chances at 33%. Cause I just don't get it at all.

You're saying that any time there are 10 opponents in and you call an all-in bet that you limit yourself to a 1/3 shot of making the money? Following that same logic, if there are 5 players in and you call an all-in bet then you're limiting yourself to a 50% ITM.

The fact is that your ITM percentage is not dictated by the the # of players when faced with an all-in decision. That's why we do the math to determine the chance of busting out here or winning.

Since AK figures to be a favorite most of the time against average opponents, you're going to win more than your fair share of the time.

Claiming that your shot of finishing ITM is capped at a fixed figure without considering your hand and the opponents' possible range of hands is flat out incorrect.

[BradleyT]

When did I say it was based on players? It was based on holdings. Maybe AK is 40% here, maybe it's 10% here. It's probably slightly higher than my 33% but never did I say it was based on the number of players left, that's not relevant to the concept.

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
When did I say it was based on players? It was based on holdings. Maybe AK is 40% here, maybe it's 10% here. It's probably slightly higher than my 33% but never did I say it was based on the number of players left, that's not relevant to the concept.

[/ QUOTE ]
You didn't say it was based on players, but the only way I can logically come to 33% from any of the numbers in the post is taking #payouts/#numplayers = 3/10.

You never validated that figure at all, and I'm just trying to understand how you came to it. What if this is against two random hands? Is his ITM still limited to 33%? Of course not.

I'd just like to understand how you came up with that particular figure. I understand that if you have a 60% chance of busting, then you have a maximum of 40% to finish in the money. But you have to put your stack in at some point in the tourney, which is why nobody's ITM% ever matches the theoretical 100% possible.

[BradleyT]

I was just guessing what AK vs. Ax vs. pair was...


Holdem Hi: 1370754 enumerated boards
cards win %win lose %lose tie %tie EV
Ad Kd 486665 35.50 861381 62.84 22708 1.66 0.363
Js Ah 257241 18.77 1090805 79.58 22708 1.66 0.196
8c 8d 604140 44.07 763143 55.67 3471 0.25 0.442

And while tripling up is awesome, it still doesn't mean you'll be ITM 100% after it happens, but perhaps as high as 90%-95%. So you would take your chance to win and multiply it by your chance to get ITM with such a large stack to get your ITM cap (which would probably be about 33% [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] ) But of course you would have an extremely high proportion of 1st place finishes after you triple up.

So is this play better to make at higher buyins where 33% ITM isn't achievable and worse to make at low buyins where 33% ITM is easier to achieve? I would think so.

[imcastleman]

To Original Poster:
This person who defends making this call has well thought out reasons for making it, however, you can NOT win the tournament if you lose now. In my experience, doubling up does not increase your chances a great deal of getting in the money. I would fold this AK 100% of the time here. You would be gambling by calling and are likely 35-45% to beat both opponents, possibly less if one has AK also and the other has a pair. My opinion is to fold.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
When did I say it was based on players? It was based on holdings. Maybe AK is 40% here, maybe it's 10% here. It's probably slightly higher than my 33% but never did I say it was based on the number of players left, that's not relevant to the concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think its significantly less.