|
|
#22
06-10-2005, 01:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
[ QUOTE ]
Did you break down the effect by stack size ranges? It should be larger for smaller stacks. Would be curious to see ranges of 3x, 4x, 5x, 6x, 7x, 8x. [/ QUOTE ] I did break it down, but again the sample size problem is magnified when the data is broken down. You can see the 2 "big stack" categories are out of place, but the 3 "small stack" categories behave as you describe. 
|
|
#23
06-10-2005, 01:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
[ QUOTE ]
Typical Party SnG payout, 6 people left, you are UTG with 1000 other stack sizes are: 1400 , 600, 1000, 1800, 2200 (bb). Blinds are 100/200. Blinds will increase to 150/300 in 9 hands. Opponents are about as good as you. [/ QUOTE ] The bold is why I don't think you should give up much EV to preserve fold equity. If everyone has FE then no one is advantaged because everyone is at the same skill level. The key question becomes how much of a disadvantage does it become when you don't have FE and everyone else does (i.e. you are the short stack). In my experience, good players generally don't push against a really short stack in the BB. The short stack tends to call (an if really short, then has to call). The other players also may want to keep the shorty around if in a bubble situation. Anyway, with players of equal (and decent) skill, I wouldn't drop a ton of EV to preserve future FE. However, if the other players are worse end-game players than you (i.e. tight), then I think having fold equity is worth a lot and thus worth an in the moment -EV play to take a shot at. Pokerscott
|
|
#24
06-10-2005, 01:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
That is killer. Too bad you don't have enough hands. Very interesting stuff. Besides stack sizes I think the 2 other most important variables will be when blinds change and how many players are left in the game.
|
|
#25
06-10-2005, 01:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
YOU WERE RIGHT
Not that it matters now cause you are ignoring me, but if PVS' data for 1-5bb is accurate then you were correct on the QJ poll. The players would have to be really loose to make that push incorrect. (They can still be theoretically loose enough to make the push incorrect, but in reality that will rarely occur.)
You were right, I was wrong. Hopefully somone besides me learned something from our debate.
|
|
#26
06-10-2005, 01:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
If you look at some of PVS replies I think he shows at least that you should consider pushing sometimes even though ICM models the push as -EV. I think we are a far way from quantifying how much ICM is wrong but I think the shorter your stack, the fewer the players, and the sooner the increase in the blinds the more you should be inclined to push.
|
|
#27
06-10-2005, 01:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
I'm assuming this graph is the difference between the prize pool percentage predicted by ICM and the actual prize won, averaged? If so, did you try to take into account that the ~2,000 hands you used from each tournament are highly dependent on each other?
|
|
#28
06-10-2005, 01:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
I know this is a small sample size, but I hope Eastbay will take a look. He was doing some position based corrections to ICM and I think he was doing the greatest correction to the UTG position, but you are showing UTG to be the most inline with ICM.
I haven't started yet, but I'm going to do that project about collecting hand data and would certainly share data for other projects.
|
|
#29
06-10-2005, 01:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: YOU WERE RIGHT
Meh. I can still see titles of posts.
Look, among other reasons, I post here because I was awful a year and a half ago and learned enough from this site to get to this point. It's fine to question my play - there are a half dozen posters I can name off the top of my head just in this one subforum that are equal to or better than me, and it's no contest in the high stakes NL or shorthanded forums. It's not fine to be obnoxious about it. Having said that: look at the overall picture and don't try to quantify it, either with or without an improved ICM. The ICM is a useful toy I played with for 5 minutes once, saw the flaws of and left alone because even if you could make a perfect version of it (you can't, microbet is absolutely right about different ranges of calling ranges and that takes too much user input) you'd never be able to make a decision based on it within 30 seconds. I'll be happy to see a version of this that says to make a call with kings, queens and maybe JJ-88, AK-AQ in the example I put up. It could still be off in the other direction but it would be pretty useful to draw a comparison with the original. Anyway, apology accepted.
|
|
#30
06-10-2005, 02:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How much $EV will you give up?
[ QUOTE ]
I'm assuming this graph is the difference between the prize pool percentage predicted by ICM and the actual prize won, averaged? [/ QUOTE ] Yes. [ QUOTE ] If so, did you try to take into account that the ~2,000 hands you used from each tournament are highly dependent on each other? [/ QUOTE ] no. I've heard this argument before, I think, but I still don't understand what this means. My goal was just to write a program that could report on a bunch of data using different filters. My filter for these charts was "use every 4-handed hand". I could certainly run it for with other filters if/when I get more data. btw - This is only for 4 handed hands, so it's only like 40 per tournament. Again, I just posted this to get some discussion going. The sample is too small to be useful yet.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
