Theory: Gigabet's "bands" and "The Finch Formula" Grand Unification

[PrayingMantis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
$EV=CEV translates automatically into the notion that WTAs should be played as if they are a normal cash game, i.e, the only relevant considerations are normal EV considerations, nothing more (survival considerations have zero relevancy from start to end, etc).

[/ QUOTE ] I understand that. What I want to know is, why do you and others believe that $EV = cEV in a WTA freezeout?


[/ QUOTE ]

It is the same as asking why do "we" believe that p(winning 1st)=(share of chips in play) for equally skilled players. The theoretical reasons for it were discussed in TPFAP by Sklansky (if you haven't read it you probably should) as in other 2+2 and non-2+2 publications, as well as on these forums in numerous occasions in the past. Also, as I've mentioned, there is quite a lot of evidence to support this, coming from simulations and the general helpfulness (in terms of money won) of practical tools like SNGPT etc, which are based upon ICM, the mathematical expansion for a non-WTA tourney of the formula above.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely the same as in a cash game, and _any_ EV analysis should therefore be the same for a WTA situation and a normal cash game. That's of course the immidiate conclusion of p(winning 1st)=(share of chips in play), which is the conceptual core of ICM.




[/ QUOTE ] Yes, the one follows the other. However, this proposition is valid if and only if you assume the field is equally skilled. I'm trying to find a model that goes beyond that assumption, which is generally regarded to be one of the primary weaknesses of ICM, along with its failure to account for blind size.

[/ QUOTE ]

The flaws of ICM are clear and well-known and still it is an extremely efficient model. It is also pretty clear that you are trying to find a different model. I wish you good luck and I hope this discussion was helpful.

[AtticusFinch]

[ QUOTE ]
lol, well you're getting a lot of crap for this... but i've enjoyed reading the back and forth between you curtains and mantis.

I don't tsee the point of all these WTA stuff, no tournaments are like that, does that help to discover your EV in non-WTA events?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it's a simpler scenario than a non-WTA event, which adds an extra level of complexity. I figure if I come up with a good model for WTA topurneys, it can be adjusted to handle other payout structures.