Final 4 at Commerce Tournament Deal -- Good or Bad?

[zaxx19]

I like Raymer's thinking here as too how best calculate a deals equity but im puzzled at how he believes the original poster's chances at 4th are almost identical too the chip leaders??(10%~11.4%) Maybe i am missing something but if someone could aid me in understanding that it would be appreciated. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Scooterdoo]

Interesting... thanks.

[Scooterdoo]

thanks, Greg. I guess my question was not really was this a fair deal -- it was fine in my view -- but would most of you just make a deal at this point? I would rather lock in something here and try to push out the 4th guy in any deal, but my inclination would be to play it out for the win. It seems that most of you would just as soon take a deal and go home -- assuming you like the deal. Is that correct?

[Scooterdoo]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand what you mean by "they take a break". Did your three
opponents go off to calculate while you stayed by yourself?

[/ QUOTE ]

At the Commerce, at least in the tournament series, they only allow deals with 4 left -- there's
a point system and 1st - 4th get the same points. Anyway, when the 5th guy got
knocked out, they asked if we wanted them to calculate a potential deal and we
said sure. They stopped the clock, took out a calculator and started punching
the #'s.

[ QUOTE ]
It isn't a fair deal at all, from your perspective. You were
being offered $15,600 when your EV at the time was at least $16,500, probably
more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can yo explain why it wasn't fair and how you would have calculated
a fair deal? The other two big stacks were both strong aggressive players. I did
feel that I had some good reads on them and was able to make quite a few moves
consistently on both of them throughout the final table hands. However, one had
a 30% lead on me and the other was clearly an experienced pro so locking up close
to 2nd place money was not bad, and it certainly was much more than 3rd or 4th
place which are both possibilities given the blinds/antes at the time and the
aggressive play going on with all four players. Again, the ideal deal for me would
have been to lock up around $10k and play it out. I probably should have offered
those parameters to see if we could make a deal based on that. Can you think of
one?

[ QUOTE ]
That's no reason to accept a deal that gives you less money than your
EV. It's true that there is risk involved in continuing, but all four of you share
that risk. Why should you bear the brunt of it by accepting less than your EV,
when the others get more?

[/ QUOTE ]

If I thought/knew it was a bad deal for me I
would have never taken it. I'm a pushy, type-A New York Investment Banker. I'm
not in the habit of accepting bad deals <g>.

[ QUOTE ]
The other three were happy
with the deal and I didn't want to make trouble so just went along with it given
that it seemed fair. I'd advise you to get rid of that attitude.

[/ QUOTE ]

This was a secondary consideration. One point that probably played a factor was that
earlier in the day I played in a one table $120 satellite and was down to the
final two with about a 10% chip lead. I had won the 'last longer' so already had
won close to my buy-in. The other guy, who was very talkative and a bit abrasive
wanted to split the money ($1,100). I felt I was better than him and
plus I like to play to win so suggested that the winner give the loser the buy-in
fee and we play for the rest. He was offended so wanted to just play it out. Of
course he started getting nut flushes against my tptk and took me down when his 44 held up against my Ax. I flopped the A, but he flopped the set. Perhaps
I viewed this as an omen of things to come <g>.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand. Is
the idea that the short stack would get $10,000 for walking away, while the rest
of you continue playing? What would happen to the guy's chips -- would they just
be taken out of play? I don't see any theoretical problem with this but it would
be very weird and the House might not permit it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, my thought was
just to take the 4th place player's chips out of play. I have no idea if this
is possible, but it seems fair to me if everyone agrees.

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
Can yo explain why it wasn't fair and how you would have calculated
a fair deal?

[/ QUOTE ]
There's $66,635 remaining in the prize pool for the top four players. You have about one-quarter of the chips, and are essentially tied for second place. So at the very least you should get an average payout, which is $16,658.75. Yet you were offered only $15,600.

In fact your equity should be more than average, because you have a pretty big lead over the smallest stack. The probability of your finishing first is greater than the probability of your finishing fourth -- don't you agree?

[Scooterdoo]

I understand how you got that, but to use that logic we would have to get the lowest stack to agree to about $6,600. Why would he go for so little over the locked in prize when he has so little to risk and can go all-in and challenge the others to call him -- there is almost 10k in every pot? I believe what they did, which seemed fair at the time, was to say that we all had the 4th prize money locked in. So they then did your formula based on the remaining money. Again, it seemed reasonable at the time. However, I liked the approximately EV calc method that Greg suggested which makes a lot of sense to me.

Is there a set of formulas for this that most people go by? I would certainly assume that the Commerce Club's methods to suggest pay-outs are based on some accepted standards... am I wrong?

[M.B.E.]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand how you got that, but to use that logic we would have to get the lowest stack to agree to about $6,600.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think so. It all depends on how much the others want a deal. It was late, they were probably tired, while you were raring to go as far as I can tell. This could give you a huge negotiating advantage. You might have proposed something like:

$22,000
$18,000
$18,000
$8,635

Would the others have agreed to this? Maybe not, but nobody knows since you never proposed it. If the others really want to cut a deal, and they see that you don't mind "rolling the dice" by playing on, you might be surprised by what they will agree to.

[ QUOTE ]
Is there a set of formulas for this that most people go by? I would certainly assume that the Commerce Club's methods to suggest pay-outs are based on some accepted standards... am I wrong?

[/ QUOTE ]
Most likely, whatever method those guys were using does not provide good estimates of players' tournament equity. The reason is that there is no accurate formula which can be applied with only a calculator; you'd really need a computer program to work it out. Bozeman had a series of posts on this; I will try to dig that out.

The method in Greg's post is mathematically sound, and can be implemented with just a pocket calculator, but it relies on a subjective estimate of your chance at finishing 2nd, 3rd, and 4th so I don't think the staff at any cardroom would attempt that.

[M.B.E.]

Here are three threads containing links to other threads regarding methods for calculating a fair tournament deal:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...?Number=519924

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...?Number=351422

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...;Number=324276

[Greg (FossilMan)]

If the deal is mathematically fair, I'd rather play it out. I like to think I'm above average at most final tables, and as such I deserve more than just a fair deal. If it's a deal that is good for me, more money than I think I deserve, I'll always take it. And then suggest we play it out for the title. However, I do like doing what you suggest, lock up some money, and play for the rest. It is a lot harder to calculate a fair deal in that manner, and so it happens less often than a deal for all the money.

In another post, somebody asked where I got my numbers for finishing spots. I made them up. However, if you don't like them, substitute your own estimates, and do the math. As long as my estimates aren't really off, the final numbers will be pretty close anyway.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

[Scooterdoo]

thanks, I'll check them out.