WSOP hypothetical question (not about AA)

[TaintedRogue]

[ QUOTE ]
Huge profit to be made off the cash game, and the probability of profiting is much higher than profiting off a 5000+ person tournament. Throwing in the fact that someone will stake you with no cut on profits, what's there even to discuss?

[/ QUOTE ]

Beats me.

Obviously the cash game has a far higher EV than the ME, but I think the OP is looking for the point at which the thrill of playing in the world's most famous poker tournament overcomes strictly EV decisions. I play poker for fun and for profit, but it's not an important source of income, so I'd play in the ME. I'd feel like I passed up more than an overlay; being in the ME is participating in poker history. Cash games are everywhere, but there will only be one 2006 ME.

[UCF THAYER]

But by playing in the cash game, you can play in the 2007-20xx Main Events...

[ QUOTE ]
But by playing in the cash game, you can play in the 2007-20xx Main Events...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. It was hypothetical, so I just figured the scenario was limited to this decision. Seems that the OP wanted to look at this as a not strictly EV scenario.

[TheMainEvent]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But by playing in the cash game, you can play in the 2007-20xx Main Events...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. It was hypothetical, so I just figured the scenario was limited to this decision. Seems that the OP wanted to look at this as a not strictly EV scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it really is the worst players in the world and the game goes for 2 weeks straight, you would have to have some [censored] luck to not make 6 figures profit. If someone offered you a check for $100,000+ to not play in the tournament, would you refuse that?

[ QUOTE ]
If it really is the worst players in the world and the game goes for 2 weeks straight, you would have to have some [censored] luck to not make 6 figures profit. If someone offered you a check for $100,000+ to not play in the tournament, would you refuse that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose not. It all depends on the potential profit of the game, so you guys are right, at six digits it's not close, but if my expected profit were closer to $25,000, I think I'd stick with the ME. Maybe I've misread it, but I thought OP was after the "experience" factor as well as the overlay, and for me at least, the experience factor is pretty high.

[TaintedRogue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But by playing in the cash game, you can play in the 2007-20xx Main Events...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. It was hypothetical, so I just figured the scenario was limited to this decision. Seems that the OP wanted to look at this as a not strictly EV scenario.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it really is the worst players in the world and the game goes for 2 weeks straight, you would have to have some [censored] luck to not make 6 figures profit. If someone offered you a check for $100,000+ to not play in the tournament, would you refuse that?

[/ QUOTE ]

That depends on whether the check is certified or not. Nice try with the trick question.

[TaintedRogue]

[ QUOTE ]
But by playing in the cash game, you can play in the 2007-20xx Main Events...

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't pull the wool over your eyes. You're a smart one.

[TaintedRogue]

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously the cash game has a far higher EV than the ME, but I think the OP is looking for the point at which the thrill of playing in the world's most famous poker tournament overcomes strictly EV decisions. I play poker for fun and for profit, but it's not an important source of income, so I'd play in the ME. I'd feel like I passed up more than an overlay; being in the ME is participating in poker history. Cash games are everywhere, but there will only be one 2006 ME.

[/ QUOTE ]

And maybe, just maybe, you'll get to sit next to Phil Ivey. Wouldn't that be cool [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I go to the main event and play very, very LAG poker to see if I can build up a big stack. When I bust out, I go to the cash game.