Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Tournament Poker > One-table Tournaments

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 12-18-2005, 03:38 PM
roundest roundest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 265
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well it's quite obvious really, even though we don't play much in the first few levels we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really), by outplaying people post flop and generally picking up pots. In a speed tournament your chances for doing this will be lessened because you'll see less hands in the first few levels, therefore these chips won't be as easily accessible, and therefore you'll be going into the pushbot mode with overall fewer chips than the normal SNGs. This of course will add to variance and lower ROI by design.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is false. The only thing that significantly affects variance in a STT is payout structure. The ROI part is true though, it should drop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lower ROI means higher variance, no?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-18-2005, 03:50 PM
tigerite tigerite is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 360
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

Well what he really means is the 'variance' from a single tournament will be the same - you still only have 4 possible results - 5xbuyin, 3xbuyin, 2xbuyin or nothing at all. So he is right in that sense. But in terms of distribution of results, there will be an effect. That is what we really mean when we talk of "variance" a lot of the time.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-18-2005, 04:05 PM
tjh tjh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 176
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
The early stages are more important than you think for accumulating chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really),

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone have supporting evidence for this rather than anecdotal evidence or opinions that could easilly be clouded by confirmation bias ?

Take a look at your PT database, is this true ? Is it significant ? How many chips do we accumulate by level four ? If it is obvious then how come the common wisdom that our main advantage is on the bubble is so widely accepted ?

We have so much data in our PT databases we should use it to answer these questions.

Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

--
tjh
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-18-2005, 04:11 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you get this information from PT?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-18-2005, 04:30 PM
tjh tjh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 176
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you get this information from PT?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go to tournament statistics,
First tab displays summaries.
Second tab displays toruney notes.
Click on the second tab.

Tournament detail shows winner on the right side. When you highlight a tournament the box below shows all the hands for that tourney.

I highlight tournies that I won and then look at the lower box "Games played during selected tourney" .

I scroll down in "games played during selected toruney" to the first hand of level four. My number of tournies in PT is small but I found that at the beginning of level four in tournies that I won I was below average in chip count.

Here is a table to show what the average chip count for number of players is
10 = 800
9 = 889
8 = 1000
7 = 1142
6 = 1333

Out of my sample of 11 wins

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

I show myself as below average 8 times and above average 3 times. THis is at the beginning of level 4, the first hand of level 4.

So although a larger sample is more significant this does show that NO I DO NOT ACCUMULATE CHIPS EARLY.

Would be nice if I did but I still got ITM in these tournies.

--
tjh
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-18-2005, 04:39 PM
tjh tjh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 176
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
The early stages are more important than you think for accumulating chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really),

[/ QUOTE ]

My quick analysis of my tiny tiny sample of the 22's and showing that I do not accumulate chips early on in a tourney gives me the confidence to make this challenge. To the poster that stated that we accumulate chips early on please do a random sample of your PT SNG's that you won.

Look at 10 tournies that you won use some random selection method. Look at the first hand of level 4. Post number of below average and number of above average.

I would bet that you are below average overall.

Of course you may have meant that "accumulate chips" meant to have more than the 800 starting chips and not more than average. In that case it is most likely true that we "accumulate chips" early on.
--
tjh
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-18-2005, 04:54 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

Standard deviation, which is what you guys mean when you say variance, is sqrt(%1(W1-a)^2+%2(W2-a)+%3(W3-a)+%4(BI-a)), where %1 is chance to come in 1st, W1 is money earned for first, a is expected win, %4 is odds of losing, and BI is the buy-in. So, it's certainly affected by your ROI and your place distrubution, not just the payout structure, and how it changes relative to those depends on what they are specifically. For a player with a 20% ROI or so, variance increases as ROI goes down because the terms (W1-a)^2, (W2-a)^2, and (W3-a)^2 increase much faster than the terms that decrease.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-18-2005, 06:07 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

I was hoping for a quick PT-will-produce-it-for-me way to find the answer. I've got a relatively modest 113 wins, but that's still a lot more work than I'd want to do mostly by hand.

[ QUOTE ]
So although a larger sample is more significant this does show that NO I DO NOT ACCUMULATE CHIPS EARLY.

Would be nice if I did but I still got ITM in these tournies.

[/ QUOTE ]
Rather than look from 1st place finishes backwards, I think it would be good to look at all tournaments at the end of level four and see if you're more or less likely to finish ITM when you have an above average chip stack. See what the correlation is, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-18-2005, 06:29 PM
GrekeHaus GrekeHaus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Zoidberg, for THREE!
Posts: 314
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]
Standard deviation, which is what you guys mean when you say variance, is sqrt(%1(W1-a)^2+%2(W2-a)+%3(W3-a)+%4(BI-a)), where %1 is chance to come in 1st, W1 is money earned for first, a is expected win, %4 is odds of losing, and BI is the buy-in. So, it's certainly affected by your ROI and your place distrubution, not just the payout structure, and how it changes relative to those depends on what they are specifically. For a player with a 20% ROI or so, variance increases as ROI goes down because the terms (W1-a)^2, (W2-a)^2, and (W3-a)^2 increase much faster than the terms that decrease.

[/ QUOTE ]

The last part of this statement isn't true. If you take a player who never finishes ITM or a player who always gets first, they will both have a variance of 0.

For people who fall in the middle (everyone), your variance is just a 2nd degree polynomial. For people in what would be a normal range of finishes, they will actually increase variance with a higher ROI because the higher percentages of firsts tend to create bigger swings.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-18-2005, 06:34 PM
GrekeHaus GrekeHaus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Zoidberg, for THREE!
Posts: 314
Default Re: New party \"Speed\" sngs

[ QUOTE ]

Here is a table to show what the average chip count for number of players is
10 = 800
9 = 889
8 = 1000
7 = 1142
6 = 1333

Out of my sample of 11 wins

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

I show myself as below average 8 times and above average 3 times. THis is at the beginning of level 4, the first hand of level 4.

So although a larger sample is more significant this does show that NO I DO NOT ACCUMULATE CHIPS EARLY.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you play a very tight strategy at the low buyins, you should still be accumulating chips in the early levels. You will generally be slightly below average, but in the times that you aren't, you will frequently be way above average. So your average chip stack will still be above average, regardless of the number of times you fall on either side of the line.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.