congrats. you guys win

[gergery]

You need to decide why you read and post here. Is it:
a) to learn and get better at playing poker
b) to feel smart and respected

If you want to improve your poker then its very obvious that you should get over your hurt ego (which is very natural to have in this spot), and continue to post.

It’s somewhat less obvious that getting over your hurt ego and continuing to post is also the best path towards being smart and respected here.

-g

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
unfortunately, you missed the main thrust of the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

well. ok. el D's post though was not very well thought out. do you actually believe that you have more +EV pushing with a 12BB stack? i can do some math to disprove it if you like, but it seems that it should be fairly obvious to a very experienced MTTer like yourself. of course, if you pushed with the exact same range in the same spot, then you'd have, on average a larger stack after doing so with the 12BB stack than with the 6 BB stack. but that doesn't mean that the play is more +EV. if on average, i pushed with x-y range with 12BB and my expected stack after the play was 12.2 BB, then that's +EV. if, with the same range i could push with the 6BB stack and, on average have 6.4BB, then thats MORE +EV. yeah, you steal the blinds more often with the bigger stack, but that also means that you're in MUCH worse shape when you do get called, and also, you stand to lose much more, since your stack is 12BB.

[MLG]

you honestly think that was the main point of my post? I'll sum it up. You are wrong, at least 4-5 excellent players/posters take the time to explain patiently why you are wrong. You insist that they are closeminded and you are right. Your need to be right is overriding your desire to get better at poker. That sucks.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
yes. i saw that. i've read TPFAP, so i know the idea of chips being worth more with a short stack is nothing new or novel. but i think that theory is only accurate at times. i think that its NOT simply an inverse relationship between total Tchips, and value per Tchip. i think that the value of chips goes down as you go from say red to orange, but then goes back up when your stack gets big. kind of like an upwards parabola, with the bottom valley somewhere in the orange zone. that is my theory. maybe its not entirely accurate or correct, but it would be nice to have THAT actually discussed, rather than just getting flamed for my inability to clearly state what i was trying to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me use an analogy here. Let’s say Poker is like….oh, maybe, say, ….an auto race (I just made that up now).

The guy who is the race leader is like the chip leader. The guys who are several laps behind are like the shortstacks. Guys in the middle of the pack are middle stacks.

Your comments on the relative value of red and orange stacks is like saying, “well, the guys who are way behind in the race and way ahead in the race can both accelerate real quick ‘cause no one is near them, while the guys in the middle don’t have that flexibility”. That’s true, but what you miss here that having those advantages inherently gives up something even more important: position in the race. Because if you are several laps behind in the auto race, you still need to catch up and pass the cars in the middle if you ever want to finish first.

So the advantages that you correctly point out about being a shortstack are more than offset by the disadvantages inherent in being a shortstack to start with. And being able to move up at a greater rate than the middle stacks is more than offset by the fact that you have that much farther to travel.

--greg

[Cactus Jack]

A long time ago, my best friend got into a fight with a secondary friend of ours. At a point, he had this kid on the sidewalk, sitting on his chest and holding onto his hair, and dropping his head onto the cement.

"Give up."
"no"
Thump.
"Give up?"
"no"
Thump.
"Man, this guy is so stubborn he'll get his brains beat out on the sidewalk rather than give up," I said. I was much smarter at 14 than I am now. Too many tokes.

You're getting terribly close to becoming irrelevant here. Not where you want to be.

CJ

[Exitonly]

I think if you can wade through all the insulting comments, which unfortunately there were a lot of, there actually was a good bit of discussion. There were a bunch of good points made, and i don't know why you're getting so flustered by it.

[Cactus Jack]

Unless your Dale Jarrett at Taledega. Then being behind is clearly +EV. He stays out of the big wrecks which occur in the middle of the pack and often is up front at the end. The leaders can't put him out in the pits. That's the difference between poker and racing. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Ok, so I'm a redneck poker player. hehe Good analogy, tho.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]

You need to decide why you read and post here. Is it:
a) to learn and get better at playing poker
b) to feel smart and respected

If you want to improve your poker then its very obvious that you should get over your hurt ego (which is very natural to have in this spot), and continue to post.

It’s somewhat less obvious that getting over your hurt ego and continuing to post is also the best path towards being smart and respected here.

-g

[/ QUOTE ]

thank you. you make a very good point, and i certainly respect what you have written in your posts a lot, and usually enjoy reading them. i'm def not talking about people like you here. and it wasn't so much that my ego was hurt, it was more just all out frustrating trying to clearly state what it was i was trying to state. i said that this theory is "similar" to gigs stack size thing, by which i mean i read his post over MANY times before finally understading it well enough to apply it at times to my own MTT game. by no means am i taking credit for coming up with a new, revolutionary theory. for me it took a long time before this stacksize thing finally clicked, but it was a great feelin when it finally did. i tried my best to explain what i had learned to others, but my poor wording, or inability to express myself clearly, destroyed any chance i had of that.

sorry if it sounds like i'm trying to compare myself to gig, or sklansky. i really had no intention of coming off that cocky. i was simply using them, since they are GREAT THINKERS, to prove my point of all the senseless berating that goes on here. and just how rare it is that a new idea will get looked at with an open mind, and critiqued in a constructive way.

i can't be the only one here fed up with the way that so many people seem to just scan all these posts with an eye for how they can make the poster look as stupid as possible. sure, some posts are very silly and stupid, with ideas that are very harmful and bad if you think they're true. and when the logic is THAT severly flawed, it can usually be explained in a few short sentences or less, constructively, why it is incorrect. but the fact is, many of these posts have value to them, and can improve people's games if they were given a chance rather than just immediately flamed

[pooh74]

Great analogy...and yes, its that simple.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me use an analogy here. Let’s say Poker is like….oh, maybe, say, ….an auto race (I just made that up now).

The guy who is the race leader is like the chip leader. The guys who are several laps behind are like the shortstacks. Guys in the middle of the pack are middle stacks.

Your comments on the relative value of red and orange stacks is like saying, “well, the guys who are way behind in the race and way ahead in the race can both accelerate real quick ‘cause no one is near them, while the guys in the middle don’t have that flexibility”. That’s true, but what you miss here that having those advantages inherently gives up something even more important: position in the race. Because if you are several laps behind in the auto race, you still need to catch up and pass the cars in the middle if you ever want to finish first.

So the advantages that you correctly point out about being a shortstack are more than offset by the disadvantages inherent in being a shortstack to start with. And being able to move up at a greater rate than the middle stacks is more than offset by the fact that you have that much farther to travel.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok. well, i'll try to apply it to your analogy. if you were in the middle of the pack, and i gave you a choice. you can use a nitro booster that will either shoot you out inot the lead, or stall your can for a minute, which will wind you up in the back of the pack. would you be willing to take that gamble? i think that a lot of times it would probably improve your overall chances in the race, esp if the prize pool in that race were particularly top heavy.