[citanul]

i'm pretty sure that saccing the money in hopes of starting another tournament that you hope to finish higher than 3rd in is pretty silly, hourly rate wise. i mean, where do you draw the line? is 2nd good enough? a 2nd is only 2x as good as a 3rd...

but seriously, to do this more analytically would be pretty simple, but intuitively the answer should be (for any sane distribution of a winning player) clear.

my original question was because i think it's likely that many players who are slight winning players (maybe even those who are more than slight winning players) would become losing players ROI wise if they gave up all their 3rds for 10ths. if you have a -ROI, you can't have a +Hourly rate.

citanul