No pro is worth 100-1 to reach final table are they?

[meow_meow]

[ QUOTE ]
Realistically based on the field and amount of luck still needed on the coin flips. 300-1 minimum odds with most players at 600-1 even a good player

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon, at 6k entries 600-1 assumes no better than random. I think I'd take any name pro at 300-1.

[Leonardo]

This is why you are not a bookie. You would lose all your money. Hellmuth at 600-1? You are saying he is simply even with the field? What is wrong with you? He is easily in the top 30 to win. I think the odds being laid are very good and none of you can count. The very best players have a much better chance than average, easily 5 or 6 times, I think the very very elite have as much as 20x the chance of an average player of making the final table. The edge in a multi-day no limit event is HUGE.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
This is why you are not a bookie. You would lose all your money. Hellmuth at 600-1? You are saying he is simply even with the field? What is wrong with you? He is easily in the top 30 to win. I think the odds being laid are very good and none of you can count. The very best players have a much better chance than average, easily 5 or 6 times, I think the very very elite have as much as 20x the chance of an average player of making the final table. The edge in a multi-day no limit event is HUGE.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do okay, I won't take a bet at 600-1 on an event where I can get no turnover because I can't cover a payout easily should it come in, seems eminently sensible to me. As regards to the best being 20 times more likely to make the final table I disagree, but its purely an opinion, I suspect a top pro is worth 3 buyins at a maximum. Also I am expecting around 8000 players in the main event, this could also be way out, my estimate for Hellmuth is based on his perceived inability to cope with large fields (multi thousand) full of less than accomplished players. Also again I ask what odds would you give of Hellmuth reaching the final table.

Regards Mack

[sekrah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Realistically based on the field and amount of luck still needed on the coin flips. 300-1 minimum odds with most players at 600-1 even a good player

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon, at 6k entries 600-1 assumes no better than random. I think I'd take any name pro at 300-1.

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree with you.. I would say it's a good bet, that atleast one Top 200 Pro, is going to make the final table.

Even with last year's huge field,.. Harrington (i'd say he qualified for Top 100) made the final table. Josh Arieh could have been made a case as well borderline..

If you gave me 300 to 600:1 on all the top pro's, I would scoop up the Top 200 and expect to cash in atleast once, maybe 2 or 3 times if the cards fall the right way.

[OrangeKing]

I have a feeling that there are a handful of players who are a good bet at 100-1, even...but I'm not sure I know who those players are. We really don't have a good sample of 6000 player tournaments.

[other1]

I'm really puzzled by most people's take on this. Is poker pure luck? Everyone talks about 6000 people.. so what? Does Joe Blow who won a shootout on Stars have the same chance as Doyle does in a tournament? I think not

I personally have money on a few pros to make the final table and a few to win the whole thing. Most are only $1 bets for fun, but I have put more on a few pros because I believe they have a good chance of doing it.

Is it luck Johnny Chan just won his 10th bracelet? And yes, I have money on him in the ME although I do consider him a longshot.

[OrangeKing]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm really puzzled by most people's take on this. Is poker pure luck? Everyone talks about 6000 people.. so what? Does Joe Blow who won a shootout on Stars have the same chance as Doyle does in a tournament? I think not

I personally have money on a few pros to make the final table and a few to win the whole thing. Most are only $1 bets for fun, but I have put more on a few pros because I believe they have a good chance of doing it.

Is it luck Johnny Chan just won his 10th bracelet? And yes, I have money on him in the ME although I do consider him a longshot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody is saying it's pure luck (well, not most of us). 6000 people simply means that an average person in the field has a 600-1 chance of making the final table. Obviously, the professionals are better than that!

The question is: by how much? Obviously, they're significantly better, and 300-1 would be too much to give a lot of them. 200-1 would still make a lot of them a good buy - they're going to get to the final table more than 3 times more than their share.

I said some players would be worth taking at 100-1, but we might not know exactly who (and thus, it would be hard to pick players to take at that price). But we can make some pretty educated guesses, and Chan would be a good guess.

But how much lower do you want to go? Do you really think anyone is, say, only 25-1 to make the final table? That would mean they are 24 times more likely to make the final table than the average player. It's not that we think these things are pure luck, but that anyone is a longshot to make the final table.

[blaze666]

http://www.bet365.com/home/default.asp


danny is the favourite at 20/1. raymer's getting 66/1. dolly is getting 50/1

[valenzuela]

Isnt betting on someone else gambling ehhh...perverse to say the least?

[Drewboy22]

Since I wasn't able to get a piece of anyone at the main event, I took a shot with $100. I bet $10 each on 10 pros to make the final table. All of the pros I picked had odds at 100 to 175-1. I don't recall the odds for each and I know that these guys aren't all the best, but they are players who have been hot or who I enjoy rooting for.

Darden
Cunningham
Forrest
Raymer
Tony Ma
Arieh
Habib
Watkinson
Tomko
Luske

Wanted to bet on Sklansky but there were no odds for him :-(

Whether this is a good bet...I don't know...but it's a way for me to get some action on the WSOP.