WSOP jealousy thread...

roryc

looking at the position of a few of the irish going into Day 3, its got me thinking...

Like most other jealous feckers stuck at home, we would love to be in shoes of players like KP/ ollie etc now... Personally I would give ANYTHING to be in the position they are in! Above average stack closing in on the money in the WSOP... doesn't get much better eh

So my (hypothetical) question is...

Say, like KP, you were going into day 3 with a slightly above average stack of around 100,000 chips, how much would you sell your seat for?

Im sure a few mathematicians will crunch the numbers and give an exact answer for the expected value of your stack, but it would be interesting to see how much it would take for you to sell your seat, taking in the fact that its possibly a once in a lifetime experience for some of these, and theres also the $12m first prize...

(Technically, if your 10k starting stack cost you $10,000, each chip is worth a dollar, so some of the Irish are sitting on over $100,000 :eek:)

Its a bit like that Noel Edmonds show, 'deal or no deal'...

Personally I dont think I could let go of my seat for less than $200K.

tribulus

tough question, suppose it depends on the table you draw, how confident your feeling and maybe how much you care about the experience. Maybe the minimum payout plus how ever many chips above average you are 1chip 1$ or mybe 1chip 10$.....i dunno!

what if you were shortstacked on the bubble!!

slegs

wahoo didnt realise this!! i have 0.7% of KP...

Lafortezza

I think I might make a big effort to qualify for WSOP next year. Kind of thing you need to do once in a lifetime, like the albino midget thing DeVore was describing that time...

roryc

i know, i really didnt make enough of an effort this year. I think they might be bumping up the buy-in to $20k next year, so that would make it... twice as hard....

Dub13

roryc wrote:

I think they might be bumping up the buy-in to $20k next year

I have heard this from a few people can anybody confirm this...?

Culchie

lafortezza wrote:

I think I might make a big effort to qualify for WSOP next year. Kind of thing you need to do once in a lifetime, like the albino midget thing DeVore was describing that time...

ditto.



But to answer question, I guess does it depends on a few things, ...did you get in on a freeroll, did you cough up 10k to enter etc...

More importantly, do you believe in yourself !...?

If I was still in there after day 1 proper, I'm in it to win it .... you can buy me out for 50k before a hand is dealt, but after that .... rollercoaster city here we come.

Ste05

lafortezza wrote:

I think I might make a big effort to qualify for WSOP next year. Kind of thing you need to do once in a lifetime, like the albino midget thing DeVore was describing that time...

Yeah me too, i didn't play one Satellite until a week before the 100 seat guaranteed tourney on FT, and for that I only allowed myself a $150 budget to try and satellite into it, (didn't make it) next year I'm giving myself a proper budget to qualify and I'm gonna start trying MUCH earlier. God I wish I was there....

Also if I got to the position KP et al are in I don't think I'd sell my seat.

roryc

Thats the thing though... you would probably always regret selling your seat (if you could sell it ), and everyone would like to think that they couldnt possibly sell it for any amount of money...

BUT... everyone has their price right?

I think things like whether you won your ticket or not, desire to win etc definitely come into it...

Rnger

slegs wrote:

wahoo didnt realise this!! i have 0.7% of KP...

It would be handy if that 70 euro you lent him turned into 84 grand!

jbravado

Man that would be sweet.

Id like to think that Id play it out until the absolute bitter end-the experience would be priceless.I can only imagine how good the lads are feeling at the moment-heres hoping one of them takes it down!

kincsem

My guess is 100,000 chips is worth about $20,000/$25,000. The most likely outcome is to miss the money or make about $15,000 (or whatever is the min prize).
If I was in there with 100k chips I would play on. Its only money. Its the taking part that counts.:rolleyes:

P.S. I think i might have a small piece of KP, unless mine was for the bar tab.

Mellor

kincsem wrote:

My guess is 100,000 chips is worth about $20,000/$25,000. The most likely outcome is to miss the money or make about $15,000 (or whatever is the min prize).
If I was in there with 100k chips I would play on. Its only money. Its the taking part that counts.:rolleyes:

P.S. I think i might have a small piece of KP, unless mine was for the bar tab.

Seeing as the short stacks are sitting on around starting at the moment. And the average is about 80k. 100k is worth alot more. You are above average stacked, and the average person will make the money at this stage. For every dollar in the prize pool, a chip is in play. I would consider 100,000 chips to have a face value of $100k. And i wouldn't sell for less than twice face value.

slegs

Dub13 wrote:

I have heard this from a few people can anybody confirm this...?

they have to do this really..its been 10K for years and with inflation and the online satellite system it is too easy to qualify...

patmac

There would have to be a 5% surcharge for the hotties, bad enough reading the reports but the "hotties" thread on antisup is only rubbing it in:) Definiately an ambition to get there next year.

luckylucky

Yeah have a feeling a lot of us r going to make a big push to make it there next year. I think I might just head out there next year regardless and play the smaller events and if I qualify so be it if not I'll just play poker anyway and enjoy da buzz - of course have to get that passed da wife 1st

Anyways hopefully we will have an irish winner this year to spur us on.

roryc wrote:

i know, i really didnt make enough of an effort this year. I think they might be bumping up the buy-in to $20k next year, so that would make it... twice as hard....

Might be a good idea the numbers r getting crazy. Though I have a feeling it wouldn't drastically reduce numbers.

I know Daniel Negreanu was proposing they keep the existing one but add a new one for about $50K which would have a higher percentage of well-known players thereby adding back the star-studded value.

kincsem

Mellor wrote:

Seeing as the short stacks are sitting on around starting at the moment. And the average is about 80k. 100k is worth alot more. You are above average stacked, and the average person will make the money at this stage. For every dollar in the prize pool, a chip is in play. I would consider 100,000 chips to have a face value of $100k. And i wouldn't sell for less than twice face value.

That might be what you want. I know each chip is $1, but they are paying prizes. If you want to know what an average stack is worth I guess you should look at the prize for 400th or thereabouts.

CharlieAsh

luckylucky wrote:

Yeah have a feeling a lot of us r going to make a big push to make it there next year. I think I might just head out there next year regardless and play the smaller events and if I qualify so be it if not I'll just play poker anyway and enjoy da buzz - of course have to get that passed da wife 1st

Anyways hopefully we will have an irish winner this year to spur us on.



Might be a good idea the numbers r getting crazy. Though I have a feeling it wouldn't drastically reduce numbers.

I know Daniel Negreanu was proposing they keep the existing one but add a new one for about $50K which would have a higher percentage of well-known players thereby adding back the star-studded value.

If this is Negreanus' solution then they better make it a cash only buy-in. The online sites will still run qualifiers for this event, though as you say the percentage of stars would still be higher.

DeadParrot

I dont think I made any kind of effort at all this year..
Maybe 4 or 5 sats $10-15 each
I had planned to but after my heartbreak on the WSOP express, I dunno, I just felt it wasnt to be.
That said I wish I knew who got the seat I was in for, either to cheer them on or wish voodoo on them

luckylucky

CharlieAsh wrote:

If this is Negreanus' solution then they better make it a cash only buy-in. The online sites will still run qualifiers for this event, though as you say the percentage of stars would still be higher.

Yeah I don't think the idea was to totally shut out everybody bar the big names but just to have a higher percentage of big name players that people have heard of and also just to have more quality throughout the whole field like the original WSOP - I think $50k was da figure mentioned but not totally sure if it wasn't $100k, to be honest if it is $50K I'm guessing we r still talking of a field of at least several hundred and maybe even over 1000. so they might need to bring that buy-in up to 6 figures to get what Negreanu was looking for

califano

How can we forget 'Munro'. Yeah i wonder how he did/is doing in the ME.

valor

So wish I was 21. Next year baby

Fatboydim

I can't see them increasing the buy in to more than 15k. The whole point of the WSOP is that anyne can win it. Moneymaker more than any other changed poker forever. Plus - knowing the way America works - bigger is better. Therefore they don't want to see the numbers drop. It's 8733 players this year. They'll want 10000 next year. It's the way their psyche works... and why they don't do what we do in poker with regard to changing the lower denomination chips. They like to see towers in front of the players.

My prediction... Next year the buy in will be $12k.

Am I going to go?

Absolutely.

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

really? no-one would sell (say) KP's position for less than 100k?

if someone offered my circa 50-60k, i'd be out of there like a flash, no matter how good i felt my ability to be. And, i'd consider it to be a good deal. Poker may be skill, but it is also luck.

You need to consider the medium prize. The worth of the chips is, of course, $100,000, but the medium prize is far less than this because of the huge weighting towards final table prizes.

For example, if someone offered me 50-60k; i'd have to last after position 80 to do any better. So, circa 90% of the remaining field would have to be knocked out, before i equalled an offer of 50-60k? That's a brilliant deal.

jimbling

Fatboydim wrote:

It's 8733 players this year.

Did I not see 9900 as the number this year... think it was on AntesUp. Perhaps that was an unconfirmed number....



oh... and thats a seriously tough question roryc. I'd like to think i'd say no to pretty much any amount, but if someone came to me and offered 250k for my 100k chips.. think id cave and take the money.
It depends on the confidence factor really I guess.

5starpool

jimbling wrote:

Did I not see 9900 as the number this year... think it was on AntesUp. Perhaps that was an unconfirmed number.....

Len is correct, a confirmed number, 8773, over 3k more people than last year. Mad.

Fatboydim

Yes it's 8773 confirmed [made slight typo]

In Ken's position I wouldn't sell for a million

In David Murray's I might.

gerire

roryc wrote:

(Technically, if your 10k starting stack cost you $10,000, each chip is worth a dollar, so some of the Irish are sitting on over $100,000 :eek:)

TECHNICALLY is the apt word with the prize structure below you still need to beat 800 more people after making the money to get to that $100k, are you that confident to play on and possibly make the 100k or sell out now to a pro who is wearing a disguise?....

Personally Im playing on Just in case. I havn't played for 2 days solid to hand over the reigns to someone else
1 - $12,000,000
2 - $6,102,499
3 - $4,123,310
4 - $3,628,513
5 - $3,216,182
6 - $2,803,851
7 - $2,391,520
8 - $1,979,189
9 - $1,566,858

10-12 - $1,154,527
13-15 - $907,128
16-18 - $659,730
19-27 - $494,797
28-36 - $329,865
37-45 - $247,399
46-54 - $164,932
55-63 - $123,699
64-72 - $90,713
73-81 - $65,973

82-126 - $51,129
127-189 - $47,006
190-252 - $42,882
253-315 - $38,759
316-378 - $34,636
379-441 - $30,512
442-504 - $26,389
505-567 - $22,266
568-621 - $20,617
622-666 - $19,050
667-720 - $17,730
721-774 - $16,493
775-819 - $15,504
820-873 - $14,597

roryc

gerire wrote:

Personally Im playing on Just in case. I havn't played for 2 days solid to hand over the reigns to someone else

But thats just it... its a rollercoaster ride, this is posssibly the highlight of some of these young players lives...

it would take A LOT to bring this to an end, and leave yourself always thinking 'what if...', but as ive said before... everyone has their price I think the better players would be willing to let go for a lot less maybe?

Obviously, the actual value of your chips in nowhere near $200k, but will you ever be in this position again?

Roundtower, its interesting that you are would take as 'low' as 50 - 60k. You are thinking very logically about the situation, and don't seem to be letting emotions come into your decision. Perhaps you are more confident that you could get yourself into this position again in the future?

Personally, I would be thinking more along the lines of 'this is my one and only chance etc...'.

You have to take into the fact that these players have successfully overcome 80% of the field in the biggest poker event in the world. 50 or 60k would obviously sound great any other day, but this is the wsop...

califano

roryc wrote:

but as ive said before... everyone has their price

True. Nobody cant hold out indefinately. They gave me a grasshopper.
What's a grasshopper?
Lessee, two parts gin, one part brandy, one part Creme de Menthe...

kincsem

Some people have ideas of what the Irish lads positions are worth. If the tournament ended now this is the position. 1159 players, 873 prizes. I'll eliminate the 286 players "out of the money" as it now stands. Of course that is wildly illogical.


Rank....Player Name.......Chip Count...Payout.....Cents

72......David Murray........171,400.....90,713......0.53
149.....Andrius Tapinas....133,200.....47,006......0.35
180.....John Magill...........124,500.....47,006......0.38
250.....Ken Powell...........105,300.....42,882......0.41
295.....Robert Taylor........95,200......38,759......0.41
297.....Andrew Leonard.....95,100......38,759......0.41
578.....Oliver Boyce..........64,300......20,617......0.32
599.....Robin Lacey...........62,200......20,617......0.33
669.....Joe O'Neill..............55,400......17,730......0.32
904.....Paul McCaffrey........34,600.............0......0.00

You can see that their chips are worth less than a dollar, typically about 50 cents, not $2 as some people think.

I am not factoring in the chance of the $12,000,000 first prize, or the other large prizes, but you can see that our players are far from being in contention. You can look up at the big prize, but you must also look down at elimination with no prize.

About 1/4 of the field are out of the prizes as it stands now. I expect them to pressurise the blinds and the big stacks. They have nothing to lose, the big stacks have plenty to lose.

I have a piece of one of the above players and I am hoping he can win some cash, not expecting it.

ecksor

You don't figure expectation that easily. For example, the current chip leader's chips are not worth anywhere near $10M and Paul McCaffrey's chips are certainly not worthless. Up to a point you can value chips close to linearly. Things become complicated near the bubble and every significant jump in prize-money.

roryc

Yes, but the question is not what the chips are WORTH, it is what YOU would be willing to sell them for...

Think about it like this, if somebody came into your hotel room in Vegas with a briefcase full of money, and asked to take your place (if this was possible ), what is the minimum YOU would let 100k in chips go for?

ecksor

I understand the original question. I'm just responding to the kincsem post (and to be fair, he has actually covered the flaws in his reasoning himself, but the actual conclusion has at least two extreme errors that were worth pointing out IMO).

What people will sell them for is a completely different question (because everyone seems to look at this in a different way). I would probably find it hard to turn down a $100k offer for $100k in chips at this point.

kincsem

Ok, Ecksor,

You say there are two extreme errors in my calculations, although you don't say what they are.

You are talking the talk. I am giving you an opportunity to walk the walk.


I have 2.1% of Ken Powell. Pay me $2,211.30 and its yours (105,300 chips x 2.1% x $1). I would have to confirm it with Ken and Dave O'Callaghan as I sent the money to Dave through PokerStars.

Do the deal and pay the money before play begins on day 3.

You could get 2.1% of $12,000,000 = $252,000 or anything down to $0.00.

kincsem

I think Roundtower2's assessment of Ken Powell's chips being a sell for $50k/$60k is spot on.

At the moment Ken is in the $42,882 prize band, just three places above the $38,759 prizes. He is worth about $40,000, or just under $0.40 a chip. He would have to move from 250th place to about 100th to grab a $51,129 prize.

I'll definately sell my 2.1% for a dollar a chip.


Ken Powell is in 250th position

82-126 - $51,129
127-189 - $47,006
190-252 - $42,882
253-315 - $38,759


Just for information. I am an accountant. It helps when assessing money situations.

I rate Ken as a player. I would love to see him on the final table.

ecksor

kincsem wrote:

You say there are two extreme errors in my calculations, although you don't say what they are.

Actually, I quoted the two specific errors I was referencing. I just shouldn't have said "extreme errors", I think there's another similar word to "extreme" I meant to use. "Extremal" doesn't seem to be the word. Basically, the errors show up at the two extremes of the spectrum. I.e, the chip leader and the case of Paul McCaffrey's chips. Apologies if this caused confusion.

Just for information. I am an accountant. It helps when assessing money situations.

I'm sure it does. I'm a maths student although I have no idea how that helps in anything. Taking a challenge on pure numbers personally doesn't seem productive to me.

Incidentally, your offer doesn't strike me as logical either. You're asking me to take on a highly volatile bet with little or no EV? What do I prove if I turn that down? Incidentally, I'm nowhere nearly well enough bankrolled to take on that sort of bet at any any sort of price unless you're willing to sell it for a silly price so that sort of argument isn't going to prove anything.

mewso

I believe the newly formed players association are the ones trying to get the buyin increased which in my mind would be a very bad move. The pros have the horse event now and they should be happy with that.
As to qualifying I would highly recommend you budget playing some of the qualifiers here in the Rio. Very soft and lots of options. I'm just sorry I didn't suss them out in time. Only managed to play one $175 sit and go.

RoundTower

saying "you're in 400th place so your chips are worth the same as the 400th prize" is just stupid. What if they kept all the other prizes the same, but gave 1st through ninth one billion dollars? Is your 400th biggest stack still only worth 30k? What if you're in 874th place, is your stack worthless? Even if most of the places pay way less than 50k, the off chance of getting a huge touch is too important to neglect.

What if instead of 170k in WSOP chips, I had 85 thousand euromillions tickets at 2 euro each? What would you sell that for? Most of the time they'll only come in for about 5,000 or 10,000 total when you win a few crappy smaller prizes. But they're worth much more, the true value of them is about 100k.

No way I would take 50k for my seat right now, but I would sell, grudgingly, for 500k. I reckon it's worth about 13k plus 130,000 €2 euromillions tickets.

kincsem

Some interesting comments. I know from analysis of past WSOPs that the early leaders seldom take the big prizes. They got to the top by going into gambles and getting lucky (plenty of 50/50 and 60/40 situations). Then they get tagged when their win ratio evens out, and when the real players start to play. Mostly the final table come from those bubbling under in the top 100 or so.

Nice to see you post on boards, Dave. Two Roundtowers in the same thread

I can see why someone in your position would not sell for the prize that is listed for your present position. There is not much downside potential, with a lot of upside. You are near where the prizes jump up in big money steps. And from what I hear you are comfortable in the situation and playing well.

My analysis was quick, not of the Irish players, although they were used as examples, and tried to show that different positions are worth different amounts. The total prize-pool is £82 million, and I downloaded all the players, and prizes, and considered all players worth. All the players have a chance at the big prizes but there are probably a 12 $1+ prizes for ~ 1200 players. As a sports better (as is Kpnuts) I have to sell my position often on Betfair. That is where you really learn what the market thinks, and is willing to offer.

There are not too many "name" pros still in, although I see Daniel Negreanu is very close to the top, and Allan Cunningham is nicely placed.

You can tell Ken my all-in with my % was not called . I'm happy to hold on, win or lose.

Good luck to you, Dave, and to all the lads.

Because there are a lot of different opinions I will probably copy the full list of prizewinners when the WSOP ends, and compare it to the positions as of now (end of day 3). We might learn somethng. Throw in a bit of statistical analysis, something like the Pearson coefficient on Excel which is a handy tool (probably the wrong tool) for comparing the correlation between two lists (now and prizes).

ecksor

kincsem wrote:

As a sports better (as is Kpnuts) I have to sell my position often on Betfair. That is where you really learn what the market thinks, and is willing to offer.

Yes, but market price isn't necessarily a reflection of true value. To quote someone who's proven to be pretty good at this sort of thing: "Price is what you pay. Value is what you get."

Would you settle for the best price the market offered you now for that 2.1% or are you making a different point?

kincsem

ecksor wrote:

Yes, but market price isn't necessarily a reflection of true value. To quote someone who's proven to be pretty good at this sort of thing: "Price is what you pay. Value is what you get."

Would you settle for the best price the market offered you now for that 2.1% or are you making a different point?

Who is the someone who is pretty good?

You say "The market isn't necessarily a reflection of true value" .
I believe in the wisdom of crowds.
If you know more than the market you will make millions (or already have). Good luck. I find it takes a lot of expensive research to find something missed by the betting public.

There is no WSOP market so there is no answer to your question. I value the 2.1% of Kpnuts at $900.

Where there is a market with a high volume of trading, actual bets, lays, and requests for prices, then I find the prices are accurate. Where the market is thin the value is poor.

What we have in the WSOP is a lot of hope, optimism, and self-belief. If you polled the players knocked out would you find that they (a) were happy with the result (b) disappointed (c) as expected? I'm sure few would say they were happy and did better than expected. In my opinion the players are probably the worst people to judge what they are worth.

BTW I don't even know if the guys received the money, or if they used it in entry fees to earlier tourneys.

ecksor

kincsem wrote:

Who is the someone who is pretty good?

Warren Buffet.

I believe in the wisdom of crowds.

I don't. I've seen the prices that people will pay to hit a flush draw or an inside straight draw despite the odds that my equity calculators say they actually have of hitting. I continue to trust the software rather than the players when it comes to calculating the correct value.

There is no WSOP market so there is no answer to your question. I value the 2.1% of Kpnuts at $900.

Well, I'm not in a position to buy, but if you received an offer of $1000 for your share would you take it?

kincsem

ecksor wrote:

Warren Buffet.

I don't. I've seen the prices that people will pay to hit a flush draw or an inside straight draw despite the odds that my equity calculators say they actually have of hitting. I continue to trust the software rather than the players when it comes to calculating the correct value.

Well, I'm not in a position to buy, but if you received an offer of $1000 for your share would you take it?

Warren Buffett plays bridge. I agree he is as shrewd as they come but he is talking about shares / businesses. BTW I am thinking of buying some BRKB with my gambling winnings.

One person might pay to see a card, but that is not a market opinion. Other things come into it - implied odds, survival in the tourney, are two. And we are talking about the price of a players position in a tourney, not the value to call a bet in a particular pot.

If you are a tyre-kicker then there is no point agreeing a price.

I see you are a Mod on mustard, and security. Do you gamble much?

ecksor

kincsem wrote:

Warren Buffett plays bridge. I agree he is as shrewd as they come but he is talking about shares / businesses. BTW I am thinking of buying some BRKB with my gambling winnings.

They're both risks with a certain expected value. Where do you see the difference for the purpose of this discussion? Besides, the statement is true by definition no matter which one you apply it to.

One person might pay to see a card, but that is not a market opinion.

Ok, so if I round up 1000 poker players and start selling cards to players on draws you don't think I'll get an overall profit? Isn't this a crude approximation of how professional poker players make their living?

Other things come into it - implied odds, survival in the tourney, are two. And we are talking about the price of a players position in a tourney, not the value to call a bet in a particular pot.

The price of the share of a company, the price being laid to hit a flush, the price being paid to take a percentage of a player in a tournament. They are all monetary amounts which may or may not match the actual value of the thing for sale.

The discussion here is whether or not we are correctly valuing the number of chips in a given stack. I'm demonstrating why market opinion isn't necessarily trustworthy.

If you are a tyre-kicker then there is no point agreeing a price.

You were quite happy to quote me a price last night. For the point of illustration you could answer yes or no or suggest a different price. I don't know if anyone is willing to do that sort of business here but considering the original question on the thread and the point noted by roryc's last thread, you're in a unique position to answer his question since you have the equity, but not the emotional distraction of being in the middle of a competition.

I see you are a Mod on mustard, and security. Do you gamble much?

Yeah, I play some poker.

kincsem

ecksor wrote:

Where do you see the difference for the purpose of this discussion?

Just lapsing into a coma.

ecksor wrote:

Ok, so if I round up 1000 poker players and start selling cards to players on draws you don't think I'll get an overall profit?

I would pay to see you round up 1000 poker players. Will you be on horseback?

ecksor wrote:

I'm demonstrating why market opinion isn't necessarily trustworthy.

I missed that demo.

ecksor wrote:

For the point of illustration you could answer yes or no or suggest a different price.

Yes. I will take $500,000. Thanks. Leave it with Luke in the Fitz.

I bought stakes in four Irish players in the WSOP. My reasons were as much to see that the guys got to sit down in the main event, as it was to make a profit. The experience will do them good. I will just wait to see how things pan out. I'm happy that the all played as well as they could / luck would allow.

ecksor

Ok, I think I've been wasting my time here.

kincsem

Ecksor,

Please do not send me another PM.



I am responding here so everyone can read what I have to say.


You said I made two extreme errors.

You say
For example, the current chip leader's chips are not worth anywhere near $10M and Paul McCaffrey's chips are certainly not worthless.

You say
I understand the original question. I'm just responding to the kincsem post (and to be fair, he has actually covered the flaws in his reasoning himself, but the actual conclusion has at least two extreme errors that were worth pointing out IMO).


My reply

1.
I never valued the current chipleader’s stack. So pointing out my extreme error when I did not make a valuation is something perhaps you would explain.
What I said was “Some people have ideas of what the Irish lads positions are worth.”

2.
The “cents” number in my rough valuation is a division of the money prize / chip stack. And I did say “I'll eliminate the 286 players "out of the money" as it now stands. Of course that is wildly illogical.”
I was not bothered valuing Paul McCaffrey’s stack. I did not say it was worthless. That number is just the result you get when you divide 0.00 by 34,600.

I said
“If the tournament ended now this is the position.” Please read carefully. I did not say I was valuing their positions.

My investment is in one of the other players. The point I was making is that posters were valuing stacks at what I though was about four times their value ($2 a chip), if the competition ended as it stands now, and those posters are ignoring the chances of the players who are at present out of the money.

If you want to discuss what I say, please stick to discussing what I said. Do not try to put words in my mouth.

5starpool

Ladies, chill. This isn't even an interesting argument. At least argue about something controversial that we can all join in on like folding AA preflop or something.

kincsem

He is correcting me on my extreme error on something he said.

5starpool

I know you aren't 12 Sean so stop acting like it.

/ends lecture