New party "Speed" sngs

[psyduck]

[ QUOTE ]
It is true but ROI will still be lower. It's whether the $/hr would make up for it. Expect much increase in variance however.

[/ QUOTE ]

why will ROI be lower? why will variance be increased a lot?

I feel under-edumacated [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[tigerite]

Well it's quite obvious really, even though we don't play much in the first few levels we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really), by outplaying people post flop and generally picking up pots. In a speed tournament your chances for doing this will be lessened because you'll see less hands in the first few levels, therefore these chips won't be as easily accessible, and therefore you'll be going into the pushbot mode with overall fewer chips than the normal SNGs. This of course will add to variance and lower ROI by design.

[psyduck]

[ QUOTE ]
Well it's quite obvious really, even though we don't play much in the first few levels we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really), by outplaying people post flop and generally picking up pots. In a speed tournament your chances for doing this will be lessened because you'll see less hands in the first few levels, therefore these chips won't be as easily accessible, and therefore you'll be going into the pushbot mode with overall fewer chips than the normal SNGs. This of course will add to variance and lower ROI by design.

[/ QUOTE ]

But won't we more than make up for this by picking up chips 4 and 5 handed by pushing as dictated by ICM? In other words, we accumulate MORE chips than our non-push-happy opponents, and since we get to the bubble/ 5-handed play quicker (which lasts longer), we have even more time to make correct pushes and get lots of chips.

Where's the hole in my logic (because there has to be one...)

[tigerite]

Well maybe but I really don't think so. The early stages are more important than you think for accumulating chips. Still I guess only time will tell.

Of course the other (major IMO) factor is you will have less reads on players, and therefore less idea what they will call pushes with, especially on the bubble. This will definitely hurt your equity as well.

[tjh]

[ QUOTE ]
The early stages are more important than you think for accumulating chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really),

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone have supporting evidence for this rather than anecdotal evidence or opinions that could easilly be clouded by confirmation bias ?

Take a look at your PT database, is this true ? Is it significant ? How many chips do we accumulate by level four ? If it is obvious then how come the common wisdom that our main advantage is on the bubble is so widely accepted ?

We have so much data in our PT databases we should use it to answer these questions.

Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

--
tjh

[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you get this information from PT?

[tjh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Take a look at your PT. Look at the beginning of level 4. How many chips do you have on avarage ?

[/ QUOTE ]
How do you get this information from PT?

[/ QUOTE ]

Go to tournament statistics,
First tab displays summaries.
Second tab displays toruney notes.
Click on the second tab.

Tournament detail shows winner on the right side. When you highlight a tournament the box below shows all the hands for that tourney.

I highlight tournies that I won and then look at the lower box "Games played during selected tourney" .

I scroll down in "games played during selected toruney" to the first hand of level four. My number of tournies in PT is small but I found that at the beginning of level four in tournies that I won I was below average in chip count.

Here is a table to show what the average chip count for number of players is
10 = 800
9 = 889
8 = 1000
7 = 1142
6 = 1333

Out of my sample of 11 wins

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

I show myself as below average 8 times and above average 3 times. THis is at the beginning of level 4, the first hand of level 4.

So although a larger sample is more significant this does show that NO I DO NOT ACCUMULATE CHIPS EARLY.

Would be nice if I did but I still got ITM in these tournies.

--
tjh

[tjh]

[ QUOTE ]
The early stages are more important than you think for accumulating chips.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
we still accumulate chips there overall (which is obvious really),

[/ QUOTE ]

My quick analysis of my tiny tiny sample of the 22's and showing that I do not accumulate chips early on in a tourney gives me the confidence to make this challenge. To the poster that stated that we accumulate chips early on please do a random sample of your PT SNG's that you won.

Look at 10 tournies that you won use some random selection method. Look at the first hand of level 4. Post number of below average and number of above average.

I would bet that you are below average overall.

Of course you may have meant that "accumulate chips" meant to have more than the 800 starting chips and not more than average. In that case it is most likely true that we "accumulate chips" early on.
--
tjh

Standard deviation, which is what you guys mean when you say variance, is sqrt(%1(W1-a)^2+%2(W2-a)+%3(W3-a)+%4(BI-a)), where %1 is chance to come in 1st, W1 is money earned for first, a is expected win, %4 is odds of losing, and BI is the buy-in. So, it's certainly affected by your ROI and your place distrubution, not just the payout structure, and how it changes relative to those depends on what they are specifically. For a player with a 20% ROI or so, variance increases as ROI goes down because the terms (W1-a)^2, (W2-a)^2, and (W3-a)^2 increase much faster than the terms that decrease.

[ QUOTE ]
Look at 10 tournies that you won use some random selection method. Look at the first hand of level 4. Post number of below average and number of above average.

I would bet that you are below average overall.

[/ QUOTE ]
Random 10: above average at start of level IV 4/10; above average at start of level V 6/10. In both cases, average chips held at beginning of level was above average chip count: 1.24 x average stack at start of level IV and 1.33 x average stack at start of level V.

Not that any 10 game sample is going to prove anything.