MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
It's probably harder than you think. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

nope, its exactly as difficult as i think it is [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] holla

[lorinda]

Most of our edge comes from bubble play.

45 chips doesn't help with Folding Equity to the tune of 5% ROI

This is the major flaw. There are others but this subject is stupid.

Edit: That is to say the thread is stupid, the original post was fine, just flawed.

Lori

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of our edge comes from bubble play.

45 chips doesn't help with Folding Equity to the tune of 5% ROI

This is the major flaw. There are others but this subject is stupid.

Edit: That is to say the thread is stupid, the original post was fine, just flawed.

Lori

[/ QUOTE ]

thankyou. holla

[Nicholasp27]

that's the key point i was thinking about on my drive home

the way 2+2ers play makes it so that 45 chips don't matter as much as to a looser player....if we are tight until bubble and then pushbot with 150 blinds, 45 doens't matter

if u are gonna use that 45 to limp in 3 pots early on, then it'll add 'some' ev because sometimes u'll win pots in those 3, which will add to ur ev

if u are gonna play your standard 2+2 game even with the 45 extra chips, then the extra ev wouldn't be 5%


that's the problem with handicapping the stacks..u also gotta handicap the 45 chips...to us it may only be worth 5 chips ev to icm, whereas to a lag it may be worth more...

[Nicholasp27]

btw, i disagree that the thread is stupid

even if we are all wrong in the thread, it is sparking good discussion and getting people to think about icm more critically, so it's a good thread regardless of the 'right answer'

[Irieguy]

Seriously, it is not worth the time to prove that this whole idea is completely off.

But, Curtains is correct when he says that it is not sufficient to rebuff somebody's mathematical argument by just saying "this is wrong and I don't care what anybody says."

So, in an effort to put this nonsense to bed while still presenting a mathematical reason for why this is nonsense... I will suggest the following demonstration:

-Use Nicholas' model to calculate how much your ROI should increase if you start with 7991 chips and the other 9 players start with one chip.

Irieguy

[microbet]

Nic is not the only one to propose any math in here. I had stated before that the model should have points where the extra chips make no difference (ROI is perfect - Give someone all the chips). Perhaps you could start with ROI = 0 player and 1 extra chip not being adjusted and then figure some function that reasonably fits those points.

I don't think it is worth all that, and I probably couldn't do it, but it really isn't necessary to decide whether we are talking about a 3% difference in ROI or a .3% difference.

[microbet]

I think the extra chips are worth more to the average player than to the +ROI player. (that's based on ICM, player's styles could affect whether or not this is true in a specific case) I'm not sure what happens to the -ROI players.

[pergesu]

[ QUOTE ]
Most of our edge comes from bubble play.

45 chips doesn't help with Folding Equity to the tune of 5% ROI

This is the major flaw. There are others but this subject is stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if the initial disparity allows you to push one less time each tourney? Even if you're making +EV pushes, every time you push you expose yourself to busting out. If the stack differences allow you to pass on even just one round before pushing, that gives you an extra round to let someone else bust without the chance of busting yourself.

This kinda makes sense to me, kinda doesn't. I'm just presenting it as an idea, and hopefully someone smart can come along and make sense of it.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, it is not worth the time to prove that this whole idea is completely off.

But, Curtains is correct when he says that it is not sufficient to rebuff somebody's mathematical argument by just saying "this is wrong and I don't care what anybody says."

So, in an effort to put this nonsense to bed while still presenting a mathematical reason for why this is nonsense... I will suggest the following demonstration:

-Use Nicholas' model to calculate how much your ROI should increase if you start with 7991 chips and the other 9 players start with one chip.

Irieguy

[/ QUOTE ]

One note, I think that if you double up immediately, that theoretically the chips you gain are worth about 85% of their value. This discounts any advantageous situations you may find due to your large stack, but is from a straight ICM viewpoint. This percentage should be higher when the chips you gain are smaller, thus when you gain 50-100 chips, the chips should be worth very close to their actual value. This means that if you double up right away every tournament, and you are playing in a tournament with all equally skilled opponents, your ROI should be about 85%.

I know there are reasons why it might be higher or lower, than this above figure but the correct percentage should be at least in this ballpark.

The example of having all of the chips but 9 and giving one to each opponent doesn't really prove anything other than the fact that the more chips you gain the less they are worth in theory, which I believe that everyone involved in this debate already understands.