Simple Common Tournament Situation

[Paul Phillips]

[ QUOTE ]
Pc = Current Pot ($)
By = Bet(s) you will add to pot ($)
Bo = Bet(s) your opponent(s) will add to pot ($)
pF = Probability that opponent(s) will fold if you bet
pW = Probability that your hand wins at showdown

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget these other important variables:

Pcb = probability that you have any idea about how to calculate a meaningful result
Pfc = probability I will have asian food tonight
Phb = probability that you remind me of a dilbert character

It's difficult to express the entire equation for calculating Pcb without a proper mathematical formatting language, but thanks to a few well-located zeroes we can skip it and express the unique trivial result.

Don't you inflict enough disinformation when writing in conceptual terms? Mathematics is wonderful and pure and innocent and pained by your touch. In other posts you've adequately demonstrated you don't have even the barest grasp of simple gambling concepts like expectation and inference. Assigning pretty names to a bunch of variables isn't going to help you here. You should stick to a mode of expression that offers you more weasel room.

You spent all that time laboriously manipulating symbols and then handwaved at every part that might help you, oh, I don't know, actually DECIDE WHAT TO DO.

[ QUOTE ]
Estimates: At most one opponent will call, and you will be a 3:1 underdog if called. [...] Answer: Given these estimates, you should bet if you estimate that you will be called less than 39% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

So just to clarify this a little for me: if we wildly guess that we'll be called by exactly one person and also wildly guess that we'll be a 3-1 dog, then if we wildly guess that we'll be called less than 39% of the time, then we should move all-in? Sounds good!

One of my favorite aspects of the original star trek was that whenever spock was called upon to give an answer, he would have about sixteen decimal points ready. Even when the source data involved wild guesstimations and incomplete tricorder readings, he'd happily (ok not happily, he's vulcan) predict the chances of success right down to the billionth part. This was supposed to make him sound smarter for the folks at home but it just made him sound silly to anyone who had made it through high school science. It's not a perfect analogy but do you see where it's going?

Incidentally, as to the original question: "move in." I offer no mathematical justification but I bet this answer is still way more useful than the one I just finished needling.

[sdplayerb]

Cris,

I couldn't read the whole thing, since it is way too long, and far more complicated than needed (read mine).
One thing that is wrong is use based your opponents on 1326 hand possibilities. That is wrong since you have to take your cards into account, thus there are only 1225 hand possibilities remaining.
And I don't think KQ is calling unless you are known to pushin with a ton of hands (which can't be stated per the post by David). KQ would be quite a bad call. If antes, not so bad.

[TheGrifter]

Math schmath. This one ain't close.

[sdplayerb]

you've gotten a couple answers with #s, now you don't respond?
you ask us, and don't give your answer. kind of weak.

[AngryCola]

Of course I was wrong about this much. I admit that I didn't think that statement through enough. As I am not used to reading many of David's posts, I had no clue he would be using such "red herrings". I, unfortunately, just thought it was a clue. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] Oops.

I said in a couple other posts that I do not claim to be a world class player (or even a good one), and my opinion has not changed! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I try to think things out as best I can. I freely admit this may not be good enough.

I engaged in this discussion, because I was curious as to the the real answer. It seemed simple to me, but obviously I was wrong about that.

I'm just trying to learn, but I suppose that I shouldn't post my opinions in a way that seems to state that they are facts.

In the future I will try to add more of the math involved (which I now see is what David was really looking for) to my responses. I should have left this thread to the experts. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Happy hunting! [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[js13_tps]

so what was the answer? and whats the math formula for getting there? Does the math include a variable saying that bad players may call with a wider range of hands than good players will.

[swimfan]

Move all-in.

[TheGrifter]

I'm all in every time here. You have enough chips that you're going to pick up the blinds a fair portion of the time and that's just not going to be true if you wait a few hands.

[wjmooner]

I fold. Pushing and folding are the only options of course. I would rather push with 800 from the button or CO than push UTG for 1100 with QJ. It is highly unlikely that you have the best hand and I don't think, considering that you only have 1100, that better hands will fold here.

Chris

[BusterFlush]

I agree that the point of being the best player at the table is an important aspect of this question but not from a standpoint of out playing the others.
If you are best, others are inferior and a couple may suck. No matter what your image or the table psychology, the bad players do not pay attention or have the knowledge. How many times have you made a tricky move on a bad player to be called by bottom pair that wins them the hand because they were too stupid to fold?
This means any bet you make is risking the bet and your stack to a call or over bet. I see this as a risky out of position play with high risk/reward potential.
If you go all-in, any bad player with A-x or a pair is calling so you are a dog in almost any situation.
If it is a weak table allowing limpers, I possibly try to see a flop to break the others if it hits. If limping is punished, I fold and hope for a better hand and position soon.