|
|
#11
05-27-2003, 01:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Whats fair?
Assuming this is a moral/rightousness and not a math question-
The dealer pulls all the chips into the pot. Both players turn over their cards. AQ says, "ah damn, you're about a 2.5-1 favorite over me". AK says, "yep, but I've been murdered more times than I can count". The dealer deals out 3 cards face down. AQ suggests a chop according to mathematical fairness. AK says hell no. The dealer turns over the 3 cards and SLOWLY spreads them out. A..... Q...... Q. AK goes ballistic. Much cheering and hand slapping in AQ's corner. Several sarcastic comments about a chop being turned down by AK. The dealer is kissed by AQ and glared at by AK. The dealer turns a 2. AQ notices the dealer has not burned a card but says nothing. AK, still lamenting his fate, does not notice. Just as the dealer prepares to deal the river, a railbird yells out, "hey! The dealer didn't burn!" AK quickly leaps upon this bolt of fortune. AQ protests vigorously as the floor is called. No dice, the card must be shuffled back in, and a burn/turn commences. It's the case A. Much fist pumping by AK, dejected look by AQ. It takes 10 min to settle the crowd before the dealer can deal the river. It's a K, for AAAKK vs AAAQQ. What did you think would happen? In a fair world the best hand holds up [img]/forums/images/icons/grin.gif[/img] Leon 
|
|
#12
05-27-2003, 04:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(My) Result
I must say I´m very happy so many people got interested. I consider a split the most fair result since I dont think the plays matters if they changed hand.
I mean that the chips would have probably hit the middle even if the AQs guy had AKo and the AKo guy had AQs. Thx for all comments. You see my point?
|
|
#13
05-27-2003, 05:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No deal
"You see my point?"
No. I can't see the reason behind your thinking at all. Sorry. "I consider a split [between AK and AQ] the most fair result since I don't think the play matters if they changed hands." What is the point?? There is no logical reason to do that, even as a thought experiment. AK is better than AQ, and that's that. (Are you perhaps suggesting that the board might be changed? But that's what simulations are doing. Jimbo posted the AKvAQ sim and it leaves no doubt about who's the favorite.) "I mean that the chips would have probably hit the middle even if the AQs guy had AKo and the AKo guy had AQs." ... And the AK hand would again win handsomely! Look, if you were suggesting that two hands that are very close should be split, then (1) You'd have to define how close is close enough, and (B) AKvAQ isn't close at all!
|
|
#14
05-27-2003, 05:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Forget fairness, heres a similar math question
ok lets make this more intersting folks. same situation as originally described, but hands reversed. sb moves all in with AK os, smiles, and turns it up on table. What should the guy with AQs do? Was showing AK a good plan? What if this is a huge event, rather than a weekly £100 game?
And, what if its winner takes all? fly me to vegas, jack
|
|
#15
05-27-2003, 07:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats fair?
check your math...
total pot is $300. The correct way to figure this split (or in general, a similar split, among n players) is Money to player i =(1st place money + 2nd + ... + nth place money)* (percent of time player i is expected to win with his hand) So, for this simple case, the split should be $210 and $90. So, you think a $210/$90 split is fair despite the fact the 2nd place finisher is guaranteed a $100 prize? If the 2nd place finisher is guaranteed $100, how can it be fair for him to accept less than that in a deal? My initial calculations were correct. You must start from the premise that the 2nd place finisher is guaranteed $100, not $0. They are only making a 70/30 split of the $100 difference between 1st and 2nd place. If you've been splitting your way, you've been either ripping off, or getting ripped off.
|
|
#17
05-27-2003, 10:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats fair?
Fair is irrelevant. Play the hand out and take the result like a warrior.
|
|
#18
05-27-2003, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Time out
It seems that Dynasty is talking about tourney deals while danderso8 is talking about a deal on this particular pot, the AKvAQ situation.
The original post asked about a tournament situation with only two players left in which both players were all in. The only way to properly analyze what is fair, is to acknowledge that both players are guaranteed at least second place prize money. This is an important difference between live and tournament play. From danders' post: Money to player i =(1st place money + 2nd + ... + nth place money)* (percent of time player i is expected to win with his hand) danders was also talking about tournament prize money. He simply didn't take into account that both players have a minimum win guaranteed. He didn't realize that it isn't an all-or-nothing situation. No time out is necessary. He was simply wrong.
|
|
#19
05-27-2003, 12:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Whats fair?
Deal the hand.
In response to your thoughts, I think it would be much more "fair" if AQs realizes he moved all his chips in with the worst of it, was wrong, concedes the match regardless of the outcome of the cards. Making it a 50/50 split because both people had hands that aren't unreasonable to get all-in on is dumb. If there was a 3rd person that folded a pair of twos to the big raise should he be given his money back also since he was slight favorite over each hand individually?
|
|
#20
05-27-2003, 01:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: (My) Result
I consider a split the most fair result since I dont think the plays matters if they changed hand.
I mean that the chips would have probably hit the middle even if the AQs guy had AKo and the AKo guy had AQs. So by this logic, you'd also consider it fair to split if one had KK and the other had AA?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
