[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
Since I know most people still won't believe any of this, here's how we settle things gambler-style. QUANTIFY your beliefs about how good players are. Decide who you think the very best tournament players are and make specific predictions about their results. Now bet on it. It's so easy to reach the end of the WSOP, find a lot of well-known players have won bracelets, and then say "yep, it's skill!" But were those the specific well-known players you predicted, or are you fitting the data to the hypothesis? There are many more poker players you've heard of than you may realize until you attempt to make forward-looking predictions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I made a bet with a friend concerning this World Series. Here's what happened: We both got to draft a "team," akin to fantasy football, of 12 players. (I drafted Dan Harrington in the later rounds, actually) If any player on the either team won the event, the bet was over, and that person won. In the likely event that no one won, we simply had total cash payout to each team, and the best cash team won the bet.
He had Chris Ferguson, so in the end it came down to a pretty exciting bet. (When we followed it while it happened through pokerpages and other sites)
I suggest to readers that a fantasy football style draft is the way to go. It was fun.
Phil Hellmuth was the 3rd overall pick, I believe, but I'm sure his stock has slipped. I picked Daniel Negreanu first, he picked Phil Ivey second. We both believe those two players are the two best in the world, but hey, what do we know!

[ QUOTE ]
* How much positive equity does the very best player have in whichever currently existing $5K+ tournament you believe has the weakest field? Ignore juice. The exactly average player gets paid back his $X buyin on average. How good is the best? 3X? 5X? 10X? 20X? More?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a weak field, where blinds increase very slowly, (the structure most accomodating to players, such as the Championship at the Plaza) I believe the best player has a "5x" buyin on average. This is pretty much just picking a number without using math, but I see no reason why in a low blind, weak field, a player (such as Negreanu) to cash more than 10% of the time, and when cashing, finishing much higher than an average finish.



All in all, I think your post was very thought provoking... And of your mentioned bets, I think they all would seem like fun. Wanna bet on 2005? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]