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

[JJKillian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
take a 15% ROI player in 10/1 tournaments
1.15*11=12.65/tournament (-11 buyin = 1.65 profit)
ICM says they should only bring in 10/tournament if even skilled
12.65/10=26.5% advantage due to player skill
If you start with 845 chips and everyone else has 795 chips, then ICM says you should bring in 10.51/tournament
10.51*1.265=13.29515 = what you expect to bring in due to skill advantage

13.29515/11=1.20865=20.865% ROI

that's 5.865 points higher than his usual 15%!!!


45 chips early on DOES make a difference

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont really care what any of these things say.. if you give me 45 extra chips my roi wont go up 5%. thats all there is to it. holla

[/ QUOTE ]

nod and agree

JJ

[curtains]

Shouldn't 2+2 not be a forum where one person presents a mathematical reason for something and someone else just offhandedly says "I disagree, I don't care what you say?"

Do you all realize how absurd that is? Disagree if you want, but don't do so in such a juvenile fashion! Explain a few well thought out reasons why you disagree!

[ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't 2+2 not be a forum where one person presents a mathematical reason for something and someone else just offhandedly says "I disagree, I don't care what you say?"

Do you all realize how absurd that is? Disagree if you want, but don't do so in such a juvenile fashion! Explain a few well thought out reasons why you disagree!

[/ QUOTE ]

But what do you do when you agree?

[Nicholasp27]

ok, it's a small range:

45.6% (can push in sb if folded to you): ato+, 77+, kqo
50% (can push in button if folded to you): ajo+, 99+
51.8% (can push in button-1 if folded to you): ajs+,tt+

so the math shows it's +ev to push those hands first in pot in those seats first hand of the game...that is, if u think they only call with top 15% of hands (77+, a7s+, k9s+,qts+,jts+,ato+,kto+)

if you want to tighten or loosen their calling ranges, i can run the numbers and get new hands that are +ev

[curtains]

I don't know what you are saying, but whom should one be expected to believe when one provides well thought out mathematical and logical reasoning behind something and someone else dismisses it offhand saying that they "don't care" about their analysis.

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know what you are saying, but whom should one be expected to believe when one provides well thought out mathematical and logical reasoning behind something and someone else dismisses it offhand saying that they "don't care" about their analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, I misunderstood you when I wrote that. But I do want to say something about this anyway. I don't see any mathematical or logical reasoning that this is a valid approach to including skill in ICM equity modeling. I do see mathematical and logical reasonings to provide conclusions using this approach, but not such justifications for said approach. So when someone says "it isn't happening" they're just saying "sure, that math/logic is fine, but I don't believe it applies to reality and until you provide some argument that it does I have no reason to"

[Nicholasp27]

ok, even skill

10 is expected income per tourney
-1/11=-9% roi

10.51 is expected income if u get 45 chips extra
-.49/11=4.4%

so your roi went up 4.6 actual points

[Nicholasp27]

well take away the skill advantage (make hero an average player) and it's still >4 added to your actual roi number

that's the math of what ICM is saying

the question is: do u think that in practical applications, icm is correct in giving you 1% of the prize pool (50 cents) for gaining 5% of your stack with even stacks? if u think icm is inaccurate, then that is one argument...but i haven't heard an argument why the math, assuming that icm is correct, is wrong

icm is just a model, and maybe it is overstating how important 45 chips are in a sng...it's 5% of your stack now, but when blinds are 15%+ of your stack in future levels at the bubble, does 5% of your stack really matter that much?

[donny5k]

It cannot be proven mathematically, but doesn't everyone's intuition just scream that ICM is plain wrong in this case (mathematical intuition as well as from experience)?

This is like chip count chops at the end of MTT's, everyone "knows" they give the big stacks too much.

I believe ICM is perfect for identical players, and quite good enough, but definitely not right, for players of varying skill levels. I'm pretty sure you believe that too otherwise you wouldn't be doing this. I just think your approach of adding skill into ICM is incorrect, and I think that only because I see no obvious reason that it is correct and my intuition disagrees with the results