OK, I treat economics very differently than I treat poker. In poker, I think many players ignore the math, so I use as much as I can to gain an edge. In econ, I believe that people get too 'mathy' and lose the forrest from the trees.
So, its time to play.........
MAKE LOCUTUS DEFEND HIS POSITION!!!!!!
Original Thread
[ QUOTE ]
Every players plot of EV to chips is going to have several characteristics that are identical.
1) EV(zero chips) = 0
2) EV (55M chips or 100%) = $7.5M or 100% of the chips
3) EV(chips) is a convex function: this is intuitively obvious since the payout structure is goes to the top 10% in increasing amounts, chips won at the end are much more valuable in $ than chips won in the beginning (percentage wise). The proof for this is like the proof for iso-utility lines in economics.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here we go.
In part 3, you say that b/c of the steep pay-out structure, that chips are more valuable at the end of a tournament, than they are at the begining.
We know that we can win all but 1st place prize money with a single chip, so chip value only effects EV as it effects our % chance of finishing in each position.
Iso-Utility curves tend to show the opposite quality. The more chips you have, the less value you associate with acquiring more. I think everyone agrees that doubling your chips with 5 people left, can not always double your EV, b/c they payout is capped at X% of the total chips in play.
Please explain why you believe that later chips are more valuable, using as much description as possible
......