attitude on coinflips

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Chips don't have equal value. In a cash game, you would take any (in theory, I'm sure there are exceptions) +cEV gamble. Taking these gambles in an SNG comes with an underlay (often significant). So if you flip on the 1st hand (with 10% equity at the start), you only move up to 18.44% equity when you win. So every flip costs you .78% of the prize pool. So no, taking flips will not show a profit.

[/ QUOTE ]your explanation is the same as people who question whether to take flips in MTTs, yet the consensus in MTTs is that you should push small edges

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is that the prize pool in MTTs is so massively top-heavy. Gambling makes sense because your whole aim is to get into the top few spots. In SNGs, the prize differential between 4th and 3rd is equal largest, along with 2nd -> 1st. Trying to squeeze into the money and aiming for first place are equal goals which should concern SNG players.

In a reply you said that you understand not coinflipping for your stack on the bubble. How about 5 ways? When do you think it ends? Bubble play principles extend to a small extent all the way back to 10 players.

A couple of facts and figures from the ICM, both from 1000 chip starting tourneys:

- ICM equity after doubling through in a battle of the blinds on the first hand is 18.44% of prize pool, up from (obviously) 10% of prize pool. It nowhere near doubles your equity. The break-even point is being a 54.23% favourite. This means that if it folded to the SB who went allin and revealed AKo, you would be correct to fold small pairs (larger ones are a marginal call because of the reduced chance of being counterfeited).

- Having 751 chips on the bubble with the other players all holding equal stacks of 3083 is equal to your starting equity of 10%. If you just do nothing, fold all your hands and make it to the bubble with 750 chips, you will have broken even. The situation is even better if the remaining stacks are uneven.

[Simplistic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I was going to link Aleomagus's old post regarding "A bad way to play on the bubble". But with the new forum upgrade, the search function has gone to crap.

[/ QUOTE ]regardless of bubble play, i can understand why wanting to flip with 4 left depending on your stack size is a bad thing, but then does that universally apply?

[/ QUOTE ]

the idea is that rather than risking all your chips on an early coinflip, you can save your chips (and, you know, hopefully add some along the way) for the two places where you should have the largest edge: 1) postflop play; and 2) after the blinds go up, where you will have the edge in understanding how to pushbot optimally.

[/ QUOTE ]this argument is the same as the one put forth in MTT strategy yet it is wrong there. is it wrong in sngs? perhaps. but perhaps not.

[/ QUOTE ]

its not, because there is no such thing as optimal pushbotting in mtts -- at least, it isnt anywhere NEAR as important as it is in SNGs, and so the misunderstanding of it isnt as big of a disadvantage for your opponents.

not to mention that, since you are talking about being on the good side of coinflips (the PP side), I assume you're talking about putting it allin with 99 or something like that. how is it you're able to narrow your opponents range to just overcards, and not overpairs? this is a pretty common flaw in this sort of thought.

also, the fact that it is such a short tournament is exactly why you don't need to take these coinflips. a lot of MTT experts will willingly stick their money in what they think will be a coinflip situation early because they realize that it is a long road and they have to accumulate chips. this isnt necessary in SNGs where you can simply wait until the blinds rise and steal like crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]that's the same as in MTTs though. you can simply wait till the blinds rise and steal like crazy. i'm saying if you can play optimal poker and get your money in consistently as a favourite then you're fine.

[mlagoo]

[ QUOTE ]
that's the same as in MTTs though. you can simply wait till the blinds rise and steal like crazy. i'm saying if you can play optimal poker and get your money in consistently as a favourite then you're fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

it really isn't the same, at all. in an MTT, when you have been sticking around, and you find yourself at 800 chips with blinds 50/100, there are still 10 people at your table opening before you, reraising over top of you, and calling your pushes.

by the time (in most SNGs) you find yourself at <10xBB, there will be 6 or less players left, and you will find yourself in many more situations where you can be first in the pot and have maximum fold equity.

also, getting your money in consistently as a favorite is much easier said than done.

[Simplistic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
that's the same as in MTTs though. you can simply wait till the blinds rise and steal like crazy. i'm saying if you can play optimal poker and get your money in consistently as a favourite then you're fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

it really isn't the same, at all. in an MTT, when you have been sticking around, and you find yourself at 800 chips with blinds 50/100, there are still 10 people at your table opening before you, reraising over top of you, and calling your pushes.

by the time (in most SNGs) you find yourself at <10xBB, there will be 6 or less players left, and you will find yourself in many more situations where you can be first in the pot and have maximum fold equity.

also, getting your money in consistently as a favorite is much easier said than done.

[/ QUOTE ]i'm not advocating calling all-ins where you might be taking it as a dog, rather i'm questioning the forums attitude towards coinflips. just provoking discussion [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Folding is less +$EV in an MTT than a STT, and doubling up is more +$EV.

[Simplistic]

[ QUOTE ]
Folding is less +$EV in an MTT than a STT, and doubling up is more +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]i can understand that argument except for folding. folding is always 0EV. are you talking about the difference between decisions, call/fold?

[ChrisV]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm saying if you can play optimal poker and get your money in consistently as a favourite then you're fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is demonstrably not true. For the sake of argument, let's say there's a 9 player SNG, payouts of 4-3-2, with zero rake. One of the players is going to sit there and do nothing. The other 8 are going to go allin with each other in pairs until there's only one left. One of the players always has a 51% edge in his allins. What's his equity going to be?

He has a 49% chance of busting first allin, for 0 buyins.
51% * 49% = 24.99% chance of busting second allin, for 0 buyins.
51% * 51% * 49% chance of busting third allin, for third place, paying 2 buyins. This is worth 0.2549 buyins.
51% * 51% * 51% = 13.2651% chance of winning them all. From there I'm going to be EXTREMELY generous to you and say he beats the remaining guy 100% of the time. This is worth 0.5306 buyins.

Add that all up and it comes to .785504 buyins. By placing his stack allin every time as a slight favourite, while other players just sit and wait, our hero can expect to lose over a fifth of a buyin every tourney. This is without considering rake and the chance that he'll come second to the sit-and-wait guy.

Where did all his equity go? The answer is that by stacking off, all the other players handed equity on a plate to the guy who just sat and waited.

[applejuicekid]

[ QUOTE ]
folding is always 0EV

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true.

[Simplistic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
folding is always 0EV

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true.

[/ QUOTE ]learn me?

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Folding is less +$EV in an MTT than a STT, and doubling up is more +$EV.

[/ QUOTE ]i can understand that argument except for folding. folding is always 0EV. are you talking about the difference between decisions, call/fold?

[/ QUOTE ]
Wrong. 4 way even stacks. Other 3 go all in, you fold your 72o. +EV.