Heads up Theory

[Jman28]

A consequence of my idea, which I just realized, is that when heads up, with an average Party SNG opponent, the value of chips is not constant.

When you are short stacked, the chips you lose are more valuable than the chips you gain.

When you are ahead, the chips you gain are more valuable than the chips you lose.

Therefore you will want to gamble more as a big stack, and less as a short stack, which is consistent with what I've been advocating thus far.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]

It is really still very very unclear (despite your argument that villain makes somewhat bigger mistakes when his stack is shorter) why the (fewer) times in which you actually lose much more chips than you gain when you gain, are not in fact working against you when you use this "tactic", because clearly you are letting villain get much deeper into a territory in which he'll be making less mistakes.


[/ QUOTE ]

A good point that I have realized recently. What I decided is that your opponents mistakes become greater much faster (accelerate if you will) as you get toward the largest stack disparities. Therefore, it is more valuable to take them from 3k chips to 2k chips than it is harmful for them to go from 3k chips to 4k chips.

[parappa]

[ QUOTE ]
On <font color="blue">average</font>, I lose 1 chip.

However, I never actually lose 1 chip. I never have 999 chips the next hand. Ever. Do you disagree?

I will often have 1100 chips and sometimes have 595 chips. These are the outcomes in '<font color="green"> reality</font>'

I really think that there is a difference. Really.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is an illusion. No one will be able to argue you out of it. It is absolutely fundamental and there are premises, rather than arguments, supporting this claim. You are going to have a very difficult time doing anything other than hand-waving to support this. But if you are right and can prove it, the accepted thinking on these matters will have to change. However, based on all work to date, this idea is wrong.

I'd suggest that instead of coming up with anecdotes to illustrate your points, that you come up with a clearly defined, logical hypothesis that can fit into a couple of sentences and is testable.

I'd also suggest looking into the enormous work that's been done on modifying EV through betting sequences in casino games. The proponents of such ideas (which are incorrect, but, I think that the ideas themselves extremely seductive and well worth study) make claims that are extremely similar to the one above.

[PrayingMantis]

Just a last come-back to this thread.

After some hint I got from another poster, I have just understood now why you have colored the word "average" in blue. Originally I thought you were trying to emphasize your point, but obviously, it was some unique way to point out my spelling mistakes...

Well, I'm sorry about mispelling this word, but English isn't my first language, I basically only read and write in it (very few opportunities to actually talk, more opportunities to listen), and these forums are almost the only place where I use my English these days. I write here in English without checking my spelling, because it will take too much time.

So I apologize for writing "avarage" instead of "average" multiple times on this thread. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

(Edit: and for any other mistake)

BTW, Jman, next time you can simply tell me that I'm not spelling some word right. I think it's a much better way.

[microbet]

Jman, is there any connection to block theory?

PrayingMantis, your english is great. It has never occurred to me that it wasn't your first language.

[YourFoxyGrandma]

Yeah, your English is incredible, probably a bit better than mine and I was born here. Also, I don't think Jman was correcting your spelling mistakes. He colored average in blue and reality in green in quoting your post and in his post, I think just for clarification purposes.

As far as the actual discussion, I haven't been qualified to comment for a long time, so I'll butt out.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]
Just a last come-back to this thread.

After some hint I got from another poster, I have just understood now why you have colored the word "average" in blue. Originally I thought you were trying to emphasize your point, but obviously, it was some unique way to point out my spelling mistakes...

Well, I'm sorry about mispelling this word, but English isn't my first language, I basically only read and write in it (very few opportunities to actually talk, more opportunities to listen), and these forums are almost the only place where I use my English these days. I write here in English without checking my spelling, because it will take too much time.

So I apologize for writing "avarage" instead of "average" multiple times on this thread. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

(Edit: and for any other mistake)

BTW, Jman, next time you can simply tell me that I'm not spelling some word right. I think it's a much better way.

[/ QUOTE ]

PM, your first impression was correct. I did not intend to point out your spelling mistake, but to highlight the two terms.

I think that pointing out spelling mistakes in an argument is stupid, and I'm sorry that it came across that way.

I make spelling mistakes all the time.

[Jman28]

[ QUOTE ]

Jman, is there any connection to block theory?


[/ QUOTE ]

I wish I could tell you. Probably there is, but I still don't fully understand the block theory myself, other than the point that sometimes the chips you lose are less valuable than the chips you stand to gain. In that respect, I suppose, it is similar.

At this point I've almost confused myself with what I'm saying as I have just been attempting to respond to arguments rather than think about the theory itself. Gimme a little time to regather my thoughts.

[MegaBet]

I've really been slumping in heads up for the past few days. I just can't seem to win! It seems like I'll either get caught on a steal and lose, the guy will call with a very mediocre hand which is slightly better than mine and I lose, or I'll try flop play and the guy will hit his card or get a runner runner and I lose, or I push with AK, QQ etc and I lose.

This culminated in me being 0-10 in heads up matches today and something like 5-28 in the last 3 days. I really want to find out if this is a leak or just plain old variance. To be honest, I am surprised I broke even over this run.

Anyway, the point of this post is to say thanks to Jman28 and all the others who have contributed here. I'm actually gonna read all these replies and hopefully get my back on target [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[scalafab]

You guys are going on in theorys about ev(+-) in a heads up situation without considering many details.
Consider this
Uncle Conrad with call you with any two cards.Knowing that you will push with any two it comes down to who's going to get the better pocket cards.You can play Black jack and the results in the headsup will be similar.
The other side it's that if I know you push every two I will call you with any middle strength hands and I will fold garbage.Than if you 94s will win against my A6 its not ev but its luck.