Re: Article Summary w an Example
[ QUOTE ]
Interesting stuff, but C shouldn't be a constant number, which makes things more complicated I think. I have a much better chance of doubling up early in a tournament before many of the bad players have been eliminated than later on when there is a higher % of skill players relative to the remaining field.
[/ QUOTE ]
So let me just say a couple things about this article:
This isn't all-encompassing, rigorous, "you can arbitrage your house on the things that this model says". This is quick-and-dirty "here's a guide to making decisions in the early to middle stages of tournaments that incorporates your skill appropriately."
Most players overvalue their skill in the early stages of tournaments, and do so in a manner that is provably false; that is, they think that their chance of doubling is such and such early on, but if they did have this higher chance of doubling and they simply did par from some point on, they would have much better tournament results than they do. It's not constant, but Bill and I believe constant is a better approximation than most.
As for needing a winner take all structure, that's wrong, I think. When a lot of people are left in the tournament, it's perfectly reasonable to use your remaining chips/total chips in play as a proxy for your cash equity in the tournament, as long as they're not colossal relative to the field. As you get close to the money, you should stop using this model because it doesn't have anything to do with that part of the tournament.
Jerrod
|