A Special One Time Offer!!! - Page 25

set57hike · #**241** 05-22-2005, 09:33 PM

This is ridiculous.

Let's suppose Bill Gates made the same type of calculation. Let's say that Bill Gates would demand $498,000 to sit in a chair for 5 hours (this is in line with a very low estimate of the annual income he earns from his massive fortune). Let's further assume that he would also demand $2,000 for a $40,000 coinflip, as this is a completely arbitrary level of risk aversion.

This means Mr. Gates would need an expected value of $500,000 for it to be worth his time. So, by David's reasoning, Bill G. could counter offer Daniel N. a game at $1,085,000:$40,000 and then Bill G could claim that this proves that he believes he has a 48% or better chance of defeating Daniel N. Of course, Daniel N. is going to accept an offer like this! Why? Because, as pointed out by Ed Miller, a monkey could win frequently enough to give Daniel N. a negative expectation for this wager. If Daniel N. requires the same positive expectation of $3200 on his wager, he would have to believe that he would win more than 96.7% of the time to accept this counterproposal.

Come on David.... do you really expect Daniel N. to pay you for your time ($1200) and risk aversion ($2000) as you have done above, and then use that as evidence of your self confidence? Because demanding terms of 50/40 imply to me that you believe your chance of winning is 44 4/9%, not 48%.
This kind of argument works well for your own internal decisionmaking, but it doesn't work too well to convince people you are just a marginal underdog to Daniel N.

Honestly, this kind of event probably has an abstract value to both David and Daniel in the form of publicity and "goodwill". From this point of view, I could argue that David's counterproposal actually shows that he believes that he would only win 40% or more of the time, if I put an arbitrary value of $7200 to David on the publicity and notoriety of this kind of match. Heck... sell a DVD of the match and you might make more than this in real money instead of just "goodwill".

set57hike · #**242** 05-22-2005, 09:48 PM

This is not correct. I'll assume the 50K/40K offer. Suppose Daniel N. requires the same +$3200 expectation that David requires. In that case, Daniel would have to win more than 59% for this to be worth his time.

Justin A · #**243** 05-23-2005, 12:35 AM

[ QUOTE ]
This is not correct. I'll assume the 50K/40K offer. Suppose Daniel N. requires the same +$3200 expectation that David requires. In that case, Daniel would have to win more than 59% for this to be worth his time.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might want to think next time before telling Sklansky his math is off. In other words, this post is stupid.

dbruin · #**244** 05-23-2005, 03:15 AM

There's and old saying that those who can't do...teach.

Sklansky and Malmuth's books have been invaluable to my development as a player, and for that I am very grateful. There's no need for either one of them to be ashamed to admit that Mr. Negreanu is better at high limit heads up play than either of them. I just wish (as other posters have already stated) that rather than make very flimsy excuses for not accepting the challenge that they just politely declined and went on their way.

set57hike · #**245** 05-23-2005, 09:06 AM

The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

Justin A · #**246** 05-23-2005, 01:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread the thread. David never said it had to be a good bet for Daniel. He's said numerous times that his counteroffer was meant to show what odds he'd take the bet at.

set57hike · #**247** 05-23-2005, 01:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The math is very simple really. Let p be the probability that Daniel wins. Suppose Daniel requires an expectation of +3200 in order to play the 50K/40K offer, just as David set as his arbitrary requirement to offset his risk aversion and pay for his time.
This yields the following equation:
40000p-50000(1-p)=3200

Solving for p yields

p=53200/90000, which is 59 1/9 %. Hence Daniel would have to believe his chance of winning is 59 1/9 % or better to accept David's counteroffer, using the same standard as David.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reread the thread. David never said it had to be a good bet for Daniel. He's said numerous times that his counteroffer was meant to show what odds he'd take the bet at.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe YOU need to reread the thread. Here is the specific post of David's that I was replying to...

[ QUOTE ]
Anyway it sounds like he [Daniel N.] thinks he would easily win more than the required 53% of the time. It also seems he hasn't read what I said I would play. Which among other things is taking a 20% rebate on $50,000. I will play that at the Wynn as long as there is no media.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying that Daniel would have to believe his chances of winning are 59 1/9 % or better, not 53% or better.

The comic book confrontation is fun though.

If David S. believes he is pretty close in skill to Daniel N. , he just say that instead of offering a contrived counteroffer to "prove" it. More discussion of David's "proof" here (which is in response to David's post here)

Luv2DriveTT · #**248** 05-26-2005, 08:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Tho I usually ignore this forum, I do find this whole "pissing for distance" thing quite amusing. So I offer a challenge of my own...

I'll take on ANYONE in ANY GAME THEY WANT in ANY FORMAT THEY WANT at MY HOUSE and I'll even LAY $21 to $20 odds!

[/ QUOTE ]

First time for me in this silly forum as well Al. I take you up on your challenge, provided I have the time to come over in June. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

dedmoney · #**249** 05-29-2005, 03:01 AM

jeebus, some of you guys need a little something for your chapped vaginas.

This is probably one of the greatest threads ever.

I used to think DN was like a gay version of worm from rounders, but he's actually grown on me. I especially like his new angle of being a 120 pound bully.

Shame on you sklansky for making so many excuses. Either sh!t or get off the pot, enough of this ddrawing lines in the sand BS. F it, play him for a grand, head up, just for bragging rights. 3 out of 5. All this posturing is making you look foolish.

mslucky · #**250** 06-11-2005, 02:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"the more I watch this, it sounds more and more like his mouth wrote a check he's pretty sure his poker game can't cash."

Here is the math to prove my 50-40 offer proves I must feel I am at least 48%.

If we played 100 times and I won 48 I would be ahead $320,000. My EV is $3200.

For me to flip a coin for $40,000, someone would have to pay me a minimum of about $2,000.

For someone to get me to sit in a chair for five hours they would have to pay me a minimum of $1200.

And yes, that really is how I usually think about these things.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking the same thing before I read this.
You don't have to prove anything! Better places for the money.
Your still my hero!