Thoughts on statistics

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]

It's interesting to note the $EV transfer on that call.
t4000 = 32.2% of the equity prize pool
t1500 = 18.2% of the equity prize pool
t6800 = 42.4% of the equity prize pool

I gain 10% of the equity prize pool by winning that hand, but lose 14% if I don’t. Besides the two in the showdown here, everyone else gains by this entanglement. And they gain a lot.

Just some Scuba thoughts I wanted to share.


[/ QUOTE ]



Basically, you are saying that risking 2500 chips helps the other players. We know this, and it is already taken into account by the ICM. Just because the other players benefit doesn't mean this is a fold. If you call, it's the raiser that's donating the $EV to the table. He probably has the worse hand AND he'll be eliminated if he loses. That's where the vast majority of the $EV is coming from, not from you.

You have to check AK vs. his range of hands and see if it's a call. You can't just give half the math and let people draw their own conclusions. You seem to be implying that folding AK here is correct. Maybe it is, but you need to show all the numbers before I believe that.

That's a really big raise at the 100/200 level. It would be pretty silly for him to play AA/KK like this.

[Scuba Chuck]

I'm having second thoughts about the math here. I'm thinking that at some stage, particularly this one, considering survival equity (hope I've been using this term correctly) has more weight than a slightly marginal +$EV situation. I know this goes against my math beliefs as well as yours. But there has to be more to this game than just the math sometimes.

And just for math sakes. AKs is only a 45% win probability against any pair. Against just 99+, it's only a 41% win probability. The real problem here is, psychologically at least, what hands would villain push here. I think it's very narrow, AJ, KQs, 99+. These blinds are so low, why would you risk your entire stack?

Furthermore, he did push KK here.

[EdgePort]

I agree, the math may say push or not. But I am not calling a 2500 push to win that 2500 plus 300 in blinds. Atleast not unless I know I am ahead by a good amount. I'd rather keep my chip lead and be able to use that when the blinds get higher to steal more blinds.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree, the math may say push or not

[/ QUOTE ]

This is called weak/tight. It's the way this forum views me. And frankly, pre-bubble, they view me correctly. I don't mind. This is a very bad decision, IMO, if it were 4 handed.

[gumpzilla]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm having second thoughts about the math here. I'm thinking that at some stage, particularly this one, considering survival equity (hope I've been using this term correctly) has more weight than a slightly marginal +$EV situation. I know this goes against my math beliefs as well as yours. But there has to be more to this game than just the math sometimes.

[/ QUOTE ]

This reasoning is confused. Equity is equity. What you're saying is that you think that surviving is more +$EV than the slightly +$EV push move, in which case it is mathematically correct to play the way you did. Evaluating the survival equity is harder, but still amenable to mathematical estimation, such as ICM. Saying that you're not sure about the validity of ICM, for example, is quite different than saying that the math doesn't apply. The math doesn't stop being relevant just because you haven't seen the appropriate calculation on here 684 times before. Math is the underlying structure into which you feed all of the other information.

[Scuba Chuck]

Gumpzilla the math here is flawed in only one particular part. And that part is the hand assumptions. For each individual will put what hand they want into the poker calculator, to get an answer. Depending on which one you like, will be your move. The more I think about this hand, the more I think the tighter the hand range. That would make this CALL -$EV. If you want to make the math +$EV, loosen the hand range.

The math is only as good as it's inputs. Don't confuse this too much. Survival Equity is part of considering how solid your read is. The less confident in your read (for this situation only), then folding here could be **correct**.

[gumpzilla]

I agree completely, but this doesn't mean that the math is wrong, it means your read is wrong. Garbage in, garbage out.

One of my pet peeves is when people say that the mathematical approach tells them the wrong thing to do. This only happens when you're providing it with either inadequate or erroneous information, or perhaps using a model such as ICM in a regime where it shouldn't be used. Determining the limitations of such models can be a very difficult question, and there could be places where using it is wrong, but the underlying probabilistic analysis is not at fault there. Perhaps this is all just a quibble over semantics.

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps this is all just a quibble over semantics.


[/ QUOTE ]

This would be a more interesting discussion if the hand was JJ.

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]

I'm having second thoughts about the math here. I'm thinking that at some stage, particularly this one, considering survival equity (hope I've been using this term correctly) has more weight than a slightly marginal +$EV situation. I know this goes against my math beliefs as well as yours. But there has to be more to this game than just the math sometimes.

And just for math sakes. AKs is only a 45% win probability against any pair. Against just 99+, it's only a 41% win probability. The real problem here is, psychologically at least, what hands would villain push here. I think it's very narrow, AJ, KQs, 99+. These blinds are so low, why would you risk your entire stack?

Furthermore, he did push KK here.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where you got 45% and 41%.

AKs vs QQ = 45.65%
AKs vs 99 = 47.43%
AKs vs 22 = 49.77%

I don't have PokerStove handy, but it's much better than 45% or 41%.

Pushing with KK here is either genius or cowardice (I think the latter).

Anyway, you gave us a couple more numbers, but you still haven't told us the ICM vs the range of hands you describe.

I don't think you can say "survival equity has more weight than a slightly marginal +$EV situation" because the value of survival is already taken into account by ICM when you computed the +$EV. ICM understands the value of surviving. This is why we use it instead of chip EV.

In addition, you will have 1500 left at the 100/200 level if you lose. You will survive. This is where your "skill advantage" should come into play. Anyone can fold into 3rd place with 4000 chips. A great player takes advantage of a +$EV opportunity if it exists. If you lose, you can use your skill to cash with 1500 chips.

[EdgePort]

4 handed this is a totally different hand, and should be played different.

To the point of the math. It might be that it is +EV to call, and overtime you will win out doing it. But, I will not be in enough of these exact same situtations in my life to make it all even out. Plus my personal playing style and ability also want me to fold this and play my game to steal more blinds while being the big stack, instead of playing as a small-medium stack should I lose.