#31
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you play for a living?
There's the problem. Its to win the most money.
Edit: I'm not disagreeing the the point of making a deal although the deal appears ludicrous, but the point of poker is to win the most money. It how you keep score. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
This is exactly what I was trying to say, and, [apparently] failing at.
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
Somebody else brought up the utility function of money, and they make a point. However, this is a really bad deal for some of the players. If they're so hurting for cash that this is a good deal for them (in the sense that it's better than no deal at all), then they're playing WAY over their bankroll.
Now, my real point is this. We don't know the utility function of any of these people. As such, why is it that person A should make a deal that's -EV? Why shouldn't they be the one to get the +EV deal at the expense of player B? If we know nothing about the utility function for any of the players, the only way to evaluate the deal is via EV. And in terms of EV, this was a great deal for some, and a terrible deal for others. Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
[ QUOTE ]
To make an extreme case, if you have a bookie coming over tomorrow morning who is going to break your legs if you don't come up with 25K, locking up the 30K, even at considerable expense to EV is clearly the right move. [/ QUOTE ] I sure hope your bookie has a PokerStars account. Because otherwise you don't have time to wait for a cashout. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not saying that the deal was 100% fair, im saying it was better to take the slightly unfair deal than to take no deal at all. [/ QUOTE ] It was pretty clear watching the chat that none of the three chip leaders realized just how bad this deal was. Tallal and Ulosenash (each of whom was giving up about $4000 of EV) didn't even try to negotiate. Earlbry asked for $3K extra but settled for $2K; there was no reason for him not to hold out for more. John Sears, as I understand him, is saying that we shouldn't criticize the three chip leaders for accepting this deal, because it is conceivable that given their individual financial positions, it made sense to sacrifice all that EV in order to reduce variance. First, given that they were already guaranteed $18K, it is just very unlikely that reducing variance was so important to them as to be worth $4K in EV. Second, if they were in fact in that situation, they had nothing to lose by trying to negotiate something a little better. Exclusive would certainly have given up more and still done the deal. At the very least, we can say that Earlbry, Ulosenash, and Tallal are poor negotiators. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
Lets see if anyone would take this deal. You and I bet $100 on a football game w/ no point spread. As the forth quarter starts your team is up by 4 points and I suggest that we reduce the bet to $50. After all, one touchdown can decide the whole thing and "These things tend to be a crapshoot in the 4th quarter anyways." Is anyone going to take this deal? Anyone? Come on, it will cut down your variance. If I'm on the winning side and you offer me $50 to cancel the bet, I will think about it. But reduce the bet for zero dollars??? No thanks. By not getting cash (or enough cash) for taking a less favorable payout schedule, thats what some of these players did. Hell, 2 players paid $500 for the honor of taking a bad deal. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
At the very least.
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you play for a living?
Well if that was the case I certainly wouldn't make a deal that throws away thousands of dollars.
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
[ QUOTE ] Now, my real point is this. We don't know the utility function of any of these people. As such, why is it that person A should make a deal that's -EV? Why shouldn't they be the one to get the +EV deal at the expense of player B? [/ QUOTE ] A very good point. But given that they did make the deal, and on the surface it's incredibly one-sided, seems to me that the chip-leaders were probably way above their heads in terms of the $ on the table, and gave up EV to take home what seemed like an enormous payday. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Re: It\'s not that simple.
When I started playing tournaments on PStars I was chatting it up the tournament leader board players asking questions trying to learn from them. Me and exclusive are buddies now, he's a nice guy, glad he fooled those tools, I just sent him to www.twoplustwo.com for the first time, to this thread, maybe h'll give us all a reply.
|
|
|