Matt Matros article in Cardplayer about coinflips

[twang]

[ QUOTE ]
1.) changing the prize pool, doesn't change anything. We are thinking of things in terms of % of total prizes, so it doesnt change anything if it 1$, or a million

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I'm following here. Let's say the total prize pool is $2500 and the rest is the same (buy-in $30, 1000 players, $1000 in chips, sick tourney, I know). Your share of the prize pool is 0.1% * $2500 = $2.5. Going all in on a coinflip and winning would increase your share of the prize pool to... Well, not much and a lot less than the buy-in.

On the other hand, if the prizepool was sweetened with a billion or so your initial share of the PP would be rather big (and so it would be for everyone else, obviously), way bigger than your $30 buy-in.


[ QUOTE ]
2.) Once we are in the money, the prize you get when you bust out now is completely irrelevant. Everyone gets at least that much, so it doesn't effect decision making if it is 0 or a million, doesnt matter. What matters is the distribution of the rest of the payouts.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree. I just used the ITM-example to illustrate that flipping higher in the tourney is a better deal than flipping early.

[ QUOTE ]
3.)Flips make less sense at the final table. Here, your % of total chips does not equal the % of the total prize pool, b/c some of the prizes have already been given out. Also, just surviving has real $ value. Each time someone busts out you make money.

[/ QUOTE ]Hrm...yeah. Those tiny factors slipped my mind [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]. Yes, I think this is a confusing subject. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[chuddo]

as i read his article i was thinking "i do not really agree with this", and then i got to:

[ QUOTE ]
If, after a thousand tournaments, you find that you're doubling up more than 59 percent of the time or so, congratulations; you might be good enough to fold queens in the above situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

and i realized yes, that sounds about right. i fold.

[burningyen]

[ QUOTE ]
Without going back to BurningYen's post for reference, I would speculate for purposes of discussion, that it takes roughly 2% or better of the tournament chips to get to the money and roughly 8% or better to get to the FT.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you have me confused with someone else.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you have me confused with someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apologies. I was trying to recall back from the pinned Wisdom threads. Thought it was you. My bad.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, i've officially changed sides...

I'm definitely folding here, and i like it.

In an incredibly slow structure, in a tournament FILLED with idiots. Theres no way that this +800 chip (8% of our stack) move is worth the ginormous variance. And, i don't think it's +EV. My value doesn't quite double (as Mason's big ole post has been suggesting), i'd guess i'm worth between 60-80% more. So i'd need a 60%+ chance (in one shot) to double up for me to feel right doing it.

And the stats Matt quoted at the end, about how he countned that he double dup in 55% of his tournaments or somethign... that was online tournaments right? with fast structures/low chips? In a tournament like this it's gotta be more likely to double up. Maybe i'm just an arrogant prick though.

[/ QUOTE ]

no offense exit, but i think since you ran quite well in the EPT event you're overestimating a good players ability to double up without taking big risks.

when matros says almost nobody can double up before they bust 59% of the time, he's talking about these big field 10k buyins.

everyone rips on these theoretical examples b/c they're unrealistic, like to actualy see the other guys' cards. but the fact is, part of being an expert player is having the ability to process more info than others. so at time you can tell that you're 55% or so vs. their range to double up. if you're good enough to deduce that you're in a 55% spot like that, and knowingly pass it up, you simply won't do as well in MTTs as somebody witht the same ability who takes those chances.

[AAmaz0n]

I agree with the notion that it depends on your skill level relative to the rest of the table, and the value of your time.

Consider if you are unfortunate enough on Day 1 of the WSOP to be seated at a table with Ivey, Lederer, Matasow, Helmuth, and Negreanu and Brunson. Very few of us are going to survive playing post-flop with that lineup; a coin flip looks like just lovely in that situation.

On the other hand, if you happen to get an entire table of folks that can't even spell "pokur" taking a coin flip looks much less attractive.

I know that Matros does the math and shows that the coin flip should still be right in the latter situation, but I still would rather get into a post-flop match with folks that I feel I have that strong of an edge on. If I'm going to take a coin flip with folks that I think that I have a good shot outplaying, I at least want to be the one pushing rather than calling so that they have a chance to make more bad decisions.

Tiffany makes a good point about the value of time; if you are taking time from playing a ring game where you have a favorable hourly rate, that should be factored in if you are considering a "double up quick or bust" strategy. It may be much more +EV to either put yourself in a situation where you can take control of the table early with a big stack if you are missing substancial earnings from a cash game by continuing to play.

Shauna

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know about you... but how many times have you been 100% sure someone has AK... only to see them turn over KK or AA.


[/ QUOTE ]

But combine that with the times they throw over JJ and TT

[nath]

[ QUOTE ]
I still would rather get into a post-flop match with folks that I feel I have that strong of an edge on. If I'm going to take a coin flip with folks that I think that I have a good shot outplaying, I at least want to be the one pushing rather than calling so that they have a chance to make more bad decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure. Spee expressed a similar idea in an earlier post. Here's the thing: Just because you want to play that way doesn't mean it's going to work the most often or give you the most success. Spee's post mentioned "getting it all in on the turn or a river as a 4 to 1 or 5 to 1 favorite." Yes, we would all rather wait for those spots; however, they don't come often enough and there is less of a chance your opponent will go along with you in those spots. It's not that we can't play postflop poker, it's that we need to take advantage of the situations as they arise, even if we don't "like" them or they aren't the most comfortable way for us to play.

i read the article and it made alot of sense i have to say.
just one thing that i dont understand.
how come when talking about coin flip situation he only says earlt in the tourny.the argument and tha calculations that were made,seem to be good at any stage of the tourny and not just the earlt stages.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

I haven't read this thread but I did read the Matros article. I believe he is correct for the vast majority of players but wrong for extremely good ones. That's because, in my opinion, he under estimates the expectation of a really top player.

Here's what Dan Harrington says in Harrington on Hold 'em: Volume I:

[ QUOTE ]
Professionals rank the different forms of poker by how much they consider their entry fees in a tournament to be worth. Top seven-card stud players, for instance, think that the true value of an entry into a seven-stud tournament is about twice the entry fee. (Paying $1,000 to enter a seven-stud tournament should yield, over a long run of tournaments, about $2,000 in prizes.) An entry to a razz or Omaha tournament yields about the same value. But the best no-limit hold ’em players think that a $1,000 entry fee is worth $4,000 to $5,000, and in huge events like the World Series of Poker, with many beginners in the field, perhaps as much as $7,000 to $8,000.


[/ QUOTE ]

Matros seems to indicate that estimates like this are way too high. But if Dan is correct, it's my opinion that Matros is wrong for this small select group. However, if it happens to be me he's talking about, then I agree with him.

best wishes,
Mason