Tournament Life Syndrome - Part 1 (IF) AND 2 (when, where, how etc)

jimbling

Okay. I got a bit freaked out by gholi’s reaction to my posts the other day (and the fact that some people seem to think it's a syndrome :-). It was probably the most bizarre thread ever. It ended extremely strangely as well.
But anyway, lets forget that slinging match. Lets start again.


So I am posting this to start an actual debate on the subject. A lot of the boards posters seem to think that this concept is stupid and ridiculous, but I really can’t see they’re logic. Perhaps it needs to be explained to me correctly (which is why im starting this thread), but nothing I have seen or read has convinced me otherwise. In fact, I think it’s so obvious that what they are really arguing is WHEN (which is an illusion also) you consider it rather than IF.
I mean, almost everyone admits that tournament life comes into the equation when faced with certain scenarios. I gave one extreme example* in that post and almost everyone agreed that they would fold.

So, please fill in the poll. But could you also post a response and give a reason for your decision.


I am going to wait for the eventualities of this post before continuing on with the debate (PART 2 - WHEN)
I want to get a feel for numbers here, so please reply.

*Quick summary of hand:
3 players left. 2 get paid in a top heavy tournament. you are in 2nd with 80k. 1st place has 90k and 3rd place has 10k.
You have 1010 and 1st place guy goes all in. He accidentally turns up his cards and shows AK. Do you call.
This is obviously a superficial scenario, and very extreme, but all I am trying to do is portray the existence of tournament life consideration in a hand.

Atlas_IRL

i would prob fold if i knew i could beat him heads up.. if he was clearly better than me and i thought he would nail me heads up i would take the race

correct me if im wrong but didnt Chris Ferguson do a similiar move when he won the wsop main event in 2001.
He was chip leader but was being chipped away by his opponent so he took a race when he knew he'd only be about 40+% when he had his opponent covered just and won.

cardshark202

Person who worries about 'tournament life' = fish

ianmc38

My EV equations need a bit of work. Payout figures are important as well in order to be able to derive a neater equation instead of using variables... I call here though.

jimbling

cardshark202 wrote:

Person who worries about 'tournament life' = fish

these are the types of comments I am trying to avoid cardshark. Can you explain why you think this please?
And I can assure you that is not the case. I had a discussion with a 3 time bracelet winner about this at a table. He gave an example where he would fold KK Vs a known AK preflop. I didnt agree with him, but I am sure this guy is not a fish.

58o

People who worry about tournie life = people who get blinded down to nothing(after folding in some good spots because they thought they woul be able to "outplay" there opponents later) , then finally find AA push in their remaining 6bb and get "dogged".

kebabfest

Fold if I thought I was the better player and was suffering less fatigue than the other players, An important factor after 10-12 hours play.
If I am less tired and feel I am a better player why would I take a coin toss ?

If I was more f**ked than the other player and he was playing better then I would call.

Chris Ferguson did it against T J Coultier and he got lucky after T J completely outplayed him. Jesus was very honest about this !!

smurph

Okay so you get to the Final table of a very top heavy tournament, and you are chip leader.

You have 2 options, bully the f**k out of the smaller stacks or else sit back tighten up and let the smaller stacks kill eachother off, then when down to 2 or 3 left open up your game again, and move up the money ladder to the serious money.

Is that what you mean by Tournament life syndrome?

kebabfest

In terms of " tournament life syndrome " as you put it I dont like the expression much.
If you arent prepared to put your "tournament life" at risk when you feel the situation is favourable or necessary at any stage within a tournament then you probably go quite deep in a lot of tournaments as a miserable shortstack but never make any serious money.

Waylander

Jimbling I used to have a very similar attitude to yours when i first started posting on this forum. It took a while but eventually the posts by the likes of HJ and some other long term posters here at the time, who were alot more experienced players then me swung my opinion around. If I was near or in the money I would take tournament life into account, as one of several factors to be considered, but in the early to mid stages of a tournie I rarely would. I would make the percentage call, as in the long run it will pay off. I am now of the opinion that it is rarely correct to fold if you are getting favourable odds on the call.

Ste05

Of course it should be considered, but only as part of weighing up a decision. There are other considerations that need to be taken into consideration, such as the payout structure, etc. and "tournament life" shouldn't be given undue prominence in your thought process. This is a problem alot of people have, they get blinded by their “tournament life” and make huge mistakes because of it, and basically have no hope of WINNING a tournament, but they might squeek into the last money spot more often or bubble after getting blinded out.

For example there are times when you have to call All-In with a draw, whereas some people may think that they don’t want to risk their “tournament life” and so fold and in so doing make a HUGE mistake.

As I say, it's just another consideration to be taken into account along with a load of others.

ntlbell

You really need to talk to Flipper.

He has a serious case of TLS.

His case is so bad it forces him to fold AA preflop.

A hand in poker has many variables

IMO the fact you could possibly be knocked out of the tournament should never be one of those variables.

This is not a very complex concept.

In fact it's such a simple one people have problems understanding it.

Hitman Actual

I think you're asking two different questions, and I'm not sure which one you count as tournament life:

Tourney life 1:
When you play a tournament, do you play an excessively tight game, passing up marginal edges in an attempt to survive as long as possible, hoping to just cash or, better still, hit some cards and make the big money.

or,

Tourney life 2:
When you're in the money stages of a tournament, does the payout structure and blind/stack-size ratio of the other opponents affect your thinking e.g. will you pass up an obviously +CEV situation (like the one posted) to ensure a better payout?

The thing is, I don't believe the 2nd situation has anything to do with tournament life. It's just another 'expected value' calculation that, if ignored, means that you could be losing real money.

The first situation is what players here have a problem with, I think (and I assume that's where cardshark's 'fish' comment comes from). And if we're talking about the structures of the local tournaments, or online, then I think cardshark is right: it's a fishy way to play. The players in question use two reasons for survival:

1. They pass up small edges as they will get a chance to get their money in as a bigger favourite later on, and

2. They are the best player at the table, and able to outplay their opponents. :rolleyes:

But the structures don't allow for any of this. You don't have time to wait for a better chance to get your money in, and you're not that good a player that you can afford to pass up a good chance. And the structure thing applies here as well: you're not outplaying anyone with the 15-20BB average stack that you have.

Bottom line is that, to do well in the local games (and online as well, I assume), you have to win your 55/45s, etc. Sitting around waiting is fishy.

Of course it could be different in an event like the WSOP ME, where you have time to wait, and you more than likey are better than a lot of the players around you. But I don't know enough to comment on that (maybe some of the lads who played there could comment).

I didn't answer the poll, btw, as I'm not sure what you're asking.

Ste05

There are times where getting knocked out of a tournament should come into your mind, e.g. a recent example (I think in the Nicky Q&A) where you're on the FT of an EPT and everyone has 10 BB's and all go All-In before you, do you call with XX? I know it's not realistic, but there are times when your tournament life is a consideration. The real question is when and to what degree it should come in not IF it should ever be a consideration.

EDIT: Lenny just explained it very well.

cardshark202

jimbling wrote:

these are the types of comments I am trying to avoid cardshark. Can you explain why you think this please?
And I can assure you that is not the case. I had a discussion with a 3 time bracelet winner about this at a table. He gave an example where he would fold KK Vs a known AK preflop. I didnt agree with him, but I am sure this guy is not a fish.

The guy who folded KK to AK preflop is actually quite retarded. Simple as that. The fact he has won three bracelets means he just got luckier than a lot of other retards.

Also the reason I have no time for this tournament life syndrome thing is because it causes people to horribly misplay hands in order to survive.

ntlbell

Ste05 wrote:

There are times where getting knocked out of a tournament should come into your mind, e.g. a recent example (I think in the Nicky Q&A) where you're on the FT of an EPT and everyone has 10 BB's and all go All-In before you, do you call with XX? I know it's not realistic, but there are times when your tournament life is a consideration. The real question is when and to what degree it should come in not IF it should ever be a consideration.

I think this is more what Lenny is discussing, is this TLS, or a good CEV calculation?

There was a hand in this years WSOP I'm a bit hazy on the details but I'm sure most people remember it.

Where the guy who came second place in the end folded I think an OESFD.

For basically 2 million dollars.

Is this TLS? or is it a CEV calculation?

jimbling

Ste05 wrote:

Of course it should be considered, but only as part of weighing up a decision. There are other considerations that need to be taken into consideration, such as the payout structure, etc. and "tournament life" shouldn't be given undue prominence in your thought process.

I agree completely with this. This is in fact my point. There are a huge number of factors that can and should effect a decision. Tournament life is just one of them. and NOT a dominant/prominent one... but still one to consider.

Ste05

ntlbell wrote:

I think this is more what Lenny is discussing, is this TLS, or a good CEV calculation?

There was a hand in this years WSOP I'm a bit hazy on the details but I'm sure most people remember it.

Where the guy who came second place in the end folded I think an OESFD.

For basically 2 million dollars.

Is this TLS? or is it a CEV calculation?

Ye I agree, I think Lenny put it quite well and I'd agree TLS alone is worthless but is necessary as part of an EV calc.

jimbling

cardshark202 wrote:

The guy who folded KK to AK preflop is actually quite retarded. Simple as that. The fact he has won three bracelets means he just got luckier than a lot of other retards.

Also the reason I have no time for this tournament life syndrome thing is because it causes people to horribly misplay hands in order to survive.

i hate statements like this. The arrogance is unbelievable. Ye, and I am not just talking about you cardshark, go around calling people retarded for thinking in a different manner to you. I just don't understand why Intelligent people do this.

I do believe he was wrong in this instance, that KK Vs AK is just too big an edge to pass up under any circumstances... but it is the theme of the thought he/I was getting at... that was the most extreme example.


Realistically, people think in terms of tourment life all the time anyway. I mean, how many strategy guides, books have you read where it tells you the best way to play the later stage of a tourney is to pick on the middle stacks. This is because the small stacks will have huge ranges and the big stacks can do damage to your tournament life. This is a slightly different scenario (i.e. not exactly passing up an edge) but you are still considering Tournament life are you not??????

EDIT: I am rethinking bringing that into it. Although you are considering tournament life, it is in the manner of don't throw it away - not a good comparison at all... apologies

I just can't figure out how you can come with a statement like:
Person who worries about 'tournament life' = fish
its just ludicrous.

ntlbell

If TLS ever sways you to play a hand differently/wrongly/or not at all.

You're a fish.

jimbling

lenny_leonard wrote:

I think you're asking two different questions, and I'm not sure which one you count as tournament life:

Tourney life 1:
When you play a tournament, do you play an excessively tight game, passing up marginal edges in an attempt to survive as long as possible, hoping to just cash or, better still, hit some cards and make the big money.

or,

Tourney life 2:
When you're in the money stages of a tournament, does the payout structure and blind/stack-size ratio of the other opponents affect your thinking e.g. will you pass up an obviously +CEV situation (like the one posted) to ensure a better payout?

The thing is, I don't believe the 2nd situation has anything to do with tournament life. It's just another 'expected value' calculation that, if ignored, means that you could be losing real money.

The first situation is what players here have a problem with, I think (and I assume that's where cardshark's 'fish' comment comes from). And if we're talking about the structures of the local tournaments, or online, then I think cardshark is right: it's a fishy way to play. The players in question use two reasons for survival:

1. They pass up small edges as they will get a chance to get their money in as a bigger favourite later on, and

2. They are the best player at the table, and able to outplay their opponents. :rolleyes:

But the structures don't allow for any of this. You don't have time to wait for a better chance to get your money in, and you're not that good a player that you can afford to pass up a good chance. And the structure thing applies here as well: you're not outplaying anyone with the 15-20BB average stack that you have.

Bottom line is that, to do well in the local games (and online as well, I assume), you have to win your 55/45s, etc. Sitting around waiting is fishy.

Of course it could be different in an event like the WSOP ME, where you have time to wait, and you more than likey are better than a lot of the players around you. But I don't know enough to comment on that (maybe some of the lads who played there could comment).

I didn't answer the poll, btw, as I'm not sure what you're asking.

okay.. I think you've hit the nail on the proverbial head there lenny.
Obviously I am talking about tournament life 2, not 1.
Early on in tournaments I will take any edge at all. I tried to explain this in the other thread too. The weigh up comes in when the your percentage chance of doing well in the tournament comes into the equation. i.e. in early stages you have a minimal chance (therefore the tournament life calculation doesnt really come into play as its SOO low), because anything can happen throughout the tournament.
But, in later stages, where your % chance of winning the tournament has increased dramatically, you need to start thinking of the increase and decrease to that % chance of winning (and the level of winning when payout structure is in play) when working out the EV calculation of the hand in question. - it is only a part, and a small part at that.

kebabfest

Here lads. Jimling has simply opened a thread looking for some advice, not abuse.
Youse are simply going to make people think twice about posting.
Poker is all also all about opinion. If you havent got anything constructive to say on somebody elses line of topic then maybe it is better to keep it shut ?

jimbling

ntlbell wrote:

If TLS ever sways you to play a hand differently/wrongly/or not at all.

You're a fish.

you're heads up in the final of the WSOP. You are even stacks at the moment, but your opponent is a guy you know you can read very well. You can outplay him. You can spot when he is strong and spot when he is weak. It will be a cake walk.
Do you take a 55/45 all in preflop for the lot?

Do you think someone who would fold here is a fish?

ntlbell

jimbling wrote:

okay.. I think you've hit the nail on the proverbial head there lenny.
Obviously I am talking about tournament life 2, not 1.
Early on in tournaments I will take any edge at all. I tried to explain this in the other thread too. The weigh up comes in when the your percentage chance of doing well in the tournament comes into the equation. i.e. in early stages you have a minimal chance (therefore the tournament life calculation doesnt really come into play as its SOO low), because anything can happen throughout the tournament.
But, in later stages, where your % chance of winning the tournament has increased dramatically, you need to start thinking of the increase and decrease to that % chance of winning (and the level of winning when payout structure is in play) when working out the EV calculation of the hand in question. - it is only a part, and a small part at that.

To be Frank, if I may.

I don't think you understand fully yourself what you want to discuss at all.

jimbling

ntlbell wrote:

To be Frank, if I may.

I don't think you understand fully yourself what you want to discuss at all.

you may. why do you think that?

As I said in the last thread. I am not really a theorist in regards poker. I am certainly not a mathematician. I just see a hole in the reasoning of some of the posts around the place. I put forward the tournament life been a consideration in some posts and was shot down. What I want to talk about is that it should be a consideration - which some are doing.

That last post was an attempt to portray the % changes in tournament life importance - perhaps I am doing so all wrong... but what I would like is to see this debate, which it is doing really - discover what the factors really are and how can we learn to calculate them properly. What is the real importance.

ntlbell

jimbling wrote:

you're heads up in the final of the WSOP. You are even stacks at the moment, but your opponent is a guy you know you can read very well. You can outplay him. You can spot when he is strong and spot when he is weak. It will be a cake walk.
Do you take a 55/45 all in preflop for the lot?

Do you think someone who would fold here is a fish?

Nice realistic situation, I love these.

I would have the chips in quicker than you could say "las vegas hooker"

With obviously millions all ready in my pocket and the women in vegas awaiting to be done by an Irish WSOP final tablist.

TLS would be the last thing on my mind.

Do you think having the hooker as a factor in the call is bad?

Next question.

Ste05

I think it's just the need to get rid of the tag line "Tournament Life". Because it's not relevant.

What you should really be trying to find out about, is things like CEV, $EV calculations.

In your example above of the 45/55 edge and possibility of passing it up, the factors to consider would be things like the structure of the HU battle, i.e. is there room for maneouvre (sp?) is it deep enough that you can guarantee to engineer better spots in the near future, is it deep enough that you can get away from a move gone bad, etc.

Just to say you can read him and can outplay him or that you're a better player is not enough, there may not be any more opportunities to exercise this increased skill level other then to have the balls to take this 10% edge now? (55-45).

I'm not sure how well I'm explaining this, I always have trouble articulating these points, but if you know what I'm getting at, basically the thought that doesn't/ shouldn't come into your mind here is: "well if I lose this I'm out".

I have a feeling Lenny will have a better explanation soon, as he seems to be pwning this thread.

jimbling

ntlbell wrote:

Nice realistic situation, I love these.

I would have the chips in quicker than you could say "las vegas hooker"

With obviously millions all ready in my pocket and the women in vegas awaiting to be done by an Irish WSOP final tablist.

TLS would be the last thing on my mind.

Do you think having the hooker as a factor in the call is bad?

Next question.

ntl, the situation doesnt need to be realistic. people need to think a bit more abstractly around here.

And of course.... the hooker is always a factor

carrigeen

ntlbell wrote:

If TLS ever sways you to play a hand differently/wrongly/or not at all.

You're a fish.

dont know what if he turned over 10 j suited and you had a k giving you whatever edge 60/40 or so , it still may be the correct move to fold given the small stack and possible payout

stack sizes surely have to influence your play at the business end of tournament.

I recently folded a superior hand on the money bubble to another large stack in a large tourny a hand i definetely wouldnt have folded earlier (in the tourny) to the same player.

marius

ntlbell wrote:

If TLS ever sways you to play a hand differently/wrongly/or not at all.

You're a fish.

Do you play the early rounds of a rebuy tourney the exact same way you play a freeze out?

ntlbell

Ste05 wrote:

I think it's just the need to get rid of the tag line "Tournament Life". Because it's not relevant.

This is what's causing the problem.

jimbling

Ste05 wrote:

I think it's just the need to get rid of the tag line "Tournament Life". Because it's not relevant.

What you should really be trying to find out about, is things like CEV, $EV calculations.

In your example above of the 45/55 edge and possibility of passing it up, the factors to consider would be things like the structure of the HU battle, i.e. is there room for maneouvre (sp?) is it deep enough that you can guarantee to engineer better spots in the near future, is it deep enough that you can get away from a move gone bad, etc.

Just to say you can read him and can outplay him or that you're a better player is not enough, there may not be any more opportunities to exercise this increased skill level other then to have the balls to take this 10% edge now? (55-45).

I'm not sure how well I'm explaining this, I always have trouble articulating these points, but if you know what I'm getting at, basically the thought that doesn't/ shouldn't come into your mind here is: "well if I lose this I'm out".

I have a feeling Lenny will have a better explanation soon, as he seems to be pwning this thread.

Thanks for the response......
I don't see why the name should be changed though... that is what you are considering. and I don't see selecting a coinflip as exercising increased skill level.

The point in the example above
You have a 55% chance of winning the HU battle right now? (The one single hand right now)

What do you believe your chances of winning the HU battle are if you fold? (the rest of the battle) I believe there would be plenty of situations where that would be more than 55%.

- I realise you can't answer for my example, but when it's you are in the situation you SHOULD be able to answer that question. And if you can, then you should work out which is the more EV situation... calling for current edge, or taking the long term edge over your opponent.

Perhaps the point is that that calculation is too difficult, so the easiest thing to do is just take any edge that comes along. It without a doubt simplifies things, and makes poker a much less guilt ridden game. Perhaps that is a strong argument against it. But not - he is a fish if he considers TL.



Do you know where I'm coming from? Does it make sense?

ntlbell

marius wrote:

Do you play the early rounds of a rebuy tourney the exact same way you play a freeze out?

I play the same in a FO as I do in the re-buy against a player who plays a FO like a re-buy.

Hows that!?

tekkit!

cardshark202

I can't wait for part 2.

jimbling

cardshark202 wrote:

I can't wait for part 2.

actually, part 1 turned into part 2. so sorry to disappoint.

marius

ntlbell wrote:

I play the same in a FO as I do in the re-buy against a player who plays a FO like a re-buy.

Hows that!?

tekkit!

Is that a yes then or are you avoiding the question?...i'll try and make it simpler for you...:p (and me hopefully:) )

Are your rebuy and freezout games the exact same? Is the range of cards you play in both the exact same?

ntlbell

marius wrote:

Is that a yes then or are you avoiding the question?...i'll try and make it simpler for you...:p (and me hopefully:) )

Are your rebuy and freezout games the exact same? Is the range of cards you play in both the exact same?

I actually did answer the question if you read it again.

The fact that it's a re-buy doesn't change the range of cards I play.

The situation around me does.

But this has nothing to do with TLS.

So if that's where you were going with this.

Get back in the box


It's a rebuy tournament and you noticed one guy hasn't as much as limped into a pot for the last 30 mins, he pushes all-in UTG what range of hands do you call him with? The guy directly to your right pushes every hand what range do you call him with? are ranges identical here because it's a rebuy?

califano

You worried about saving your own skin?

Yeah, I am. It covers my body.

Ste05

jimbling wrote:

Thanks for the response......
I don't see why the name should be changed though... that is what you are considering. and I don't see selecting a coinflip as exercising increased skill level.

The point in the example above
You have a 55% chance of winning the HU battle right now? (The one single hand right now)

What do you believe your chances of winning the HU battle are if you fold? (the rest of the battle) I believe there would be plenty of situations where that would be more than 55%.

- I realise you can't answer for my example, but when it's you are in the situation you SHOULD be able to answer that question. And if you can, then you should work out which is the more EV situation... calling for current edge, or taking the long term edge over your opponent.

Perhaps the point is that that calculation is too difficult, so the easiest thing to do is just take any edge that comes along. It without a doubt simplifies things, and makes poker a much less guilt ridden game. Perhaps that is a strong argument against it. But not - he is a fish if he considers TL.



Do you know where I'm coming from? Does it make sense?

Ye I get where you're coming from, but it simply isn't the point that we worry about getting knocked out of the tournament.

e,g, if we are 10 - 15 BB's deep, then we cannot GUARANTEE a better edge in the NEAR future, so passing this 55/45 edge is a mistake.

If we are 150-200 BB's deep and somehow we're presented with this edge, then it's pretty obvious we'll get a better opportunity soon enough, and in any event we are deep enough to play Post flop poker where our edge is greater, so there might be an argument in that situation for passing up this edge now, but honestly I know you are having trouble with the whole tournament life thing, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about passing up a marginal +EV situation now, IF and only IF we are GUARANTEED to be presented with a higher EV spot in the NEAR future.

It's nothing to do with worrying about getting knocked out, it's about waiting for a better spot. I could go on with this point, but I got sidetracked with something else, so I assume it'll have been answered already.

jimbling

ntlbell wrote:

I actually did answer the question if you read it again.

The fact that it's a re-buy doesn't change the range of cards I play.

The situation around me does.

But this has nothing to do with TLS.

So if that's where you were going with this.

Get back in the box


It's a rebuy tournament and you noticed one guy hasn't as much as limped into a pot for the last 30 mins, he pushes all-in UTG what range of hands do you call him with? The guy directly to your right pushes every hand what range do you call him with? are ranges identical here because it's a rebuy?

This is correct.

Either way, the rebuy is in the early stages of a tournament. TL should not be coming into the equation then (in a freezout) anyway. - or at least it is soooo small that it has no effect on the equation

marius

ntlbell wrote:

I actually did answer the question if you read it again.

Yeah - I thought you said yes but I wasn't sure...(which you will see if you read my post again:p )

The fact that it's a re-buy doesn't change the range of cards I play.

The situation around me does.

But this has nothing to do with TLS.

So if that's where you were going with this.

Get back in the box

The fact that the situation around you changes has everything to do with TLS. People are not afraid of going out at this stage so they tend to play much looser (these are the people you would presumably describe as fish...and i'd agree)...but this is not the point...I was just wondering if you are willing to take more risks in situations that you are not sure about in order to build a stack for later on?

It's a rebuy tournament and you noticed one guy hasn't as much as limped into a pot for the last 30 mins, he pushes all-in UTG what range of hands do you call him with? The guy directly to your right pushes every hand what range do you call him with? are ranges identical here because it's a rebuy?

No

ntlbell

rounders123 wrote:

You worried about saving your own skin?

Yeah, I am. It covers my body.

LOL, I love this film.

I]discussing interrogation techniques[/I
Larry: How did they finally get to you?
Sam: They gave me a grasshopper.
Larry: What's a grasshopper?
Sam: Lessee, two parts gin, one part brandy, one part Creme de Menthe...

ntlbell

marius wrote:

Yeah - I thought you said yes but I wasn't sure...(which you will see if you read my post again:p )


The fact that the situation around you changes has everything to do with TLS. People are not afraid of going out at this stage so they tend to play much looser (these are the people you would presumably describe as fish...and i'd agree)...but this is not the point...I was just wondering if you are willing to take more risks in situations that you are not sure about in order to build a stack for later on?
No

If I think I'm ahead I call/push whatever the case maybe.
If I think I'm behind I fold/bluf whatever the case maybe
MY TLS is never a factor in any hand I play.

If other people play differently based on TLS that's their choice.

I'm not saying TLS doesn't exist. It does, and pretty glad it does as people who worry about TLS are very easy to play against.

My point is, it SHOULD NOT.

So I'm not sure what your point is.

My point. *I* do not take *MY* TL into consideration in the play of a hand.

Your point. Other people do.

That's great we know this.

Now back to the topic.

Hitman Actual

jimbling wrote:

The point in the example above
You have a 55% chance of winning the HU battle right now? (The one single hand right now)

What do you believe your chances of winning the HU battle are if you fold? (the rest of the battle) I believe there would be plenty of situations where that would be more than 55%.

I assume we're talking deep-deep stacks, low blinds and long levels? I think for simplicity just call it a coin-flip, and payouts where 1st is 2 x 2nd (reasonable, I think). So maths-wise, taking the coin-flip now is payout-neutral (we make the same money in the long run by making the call). But if you're playing against a really poor player in this scenario, wouldn't everyone here expect to beat that player more than 1 in 2? I reckon most players would say they'd win at least 7 out of 10. By taking the coin-flip you're playing right into the bad players hands, and presenting him with the most profitable situation he can get, so this is bad for you. You're losing money. There's nothing wrong with folding here, I think.

But again it's just an expected-value consideration, or at least that's how I see it. But you've brought your own skill level v the opponent into the equation, so maybe this is the point jimbling is trying to get across? But I think this is all covered in TPFAP by Sklansky.

Another thing, I think it's a mistake to just dismiss any topic without really thinking about it. For example a few months ago everyone was laughing at the old 'betting for information' myth, but Sklansky has a very good take on it in his NL book with Miller, which I think has changed peoples thinking on the matter. He also gives a very good discussion on buying in short into cash games, whereas the general belief previously was that you should always buy in deep.

jimbling

Ste05 wrote:

Ye I get where you're coming from, but it simply isn't the point that we worry about getting knocked out of the tournament.

e,g, if we are 10 - 15 BB's deep, then we cannot GUARANTEE a better edge in the NEAR future, so passing this 55/45 edge is a mistake.

If we are 150-200 BB's deep and somehow we're presented with this edge, then it's pretty obvious we'll get a better opportunity soon enough, and in any event we are deep enough to play Post flop poker where our edge is greater, so there might be an argument in that situation for passing up this edge now, but honestly I know you are having trouble with the whole tournament life thing, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about passing up a marginal +EV situation now, IF and only IF we are GUARANTEED to be presented with a higher EV spot in the NEAR future.

It's nothing to do with worrying about getting knocked out, it's about waiting for a better spot. I could go on with this point, but I got sidetracked with something else, so I assume it'll have been answered already.

okay, we're getting somewhere.
When I talk of tournament life I am talking about your ability to continue in, and do will in the tournament and which decision has the best outcome on that. I am not just talking about getting knocked out at all. If the other factors (like your own M etc etc) mean that not taking the edge will hamper those chances then you take the edge.

That is why in Gholi's post, my point wasn't at all that he was risking his "life" as such, but was hampering his chances of winning. I felt with the edge been offered was so narrow, risking 1/4 your stack on that edge was not a necessary risk.

You are perfectly right about the *BBs. Obv the bigger the multiple then the bigger the edge you might pass up. And the opposite end of the scale works similarly.... i.e. that is, with a low multiple e.g. 8*BB, you're chance of staying alive in the tournament is very slim, therefore you should take any edge. In fact as your tournament life becomes more at risk you must take smaller and smaller edges... very often going into the negative side of an edge.


But this doesnt change the debate really. The fact of the matter is, a lot of people believe that in a tournament a player should NEVER pass any edge.

jimbling

lenny_leonard wrote:

I assume we're talking deep-deep stacks, low blinds and long levels? I think for simplicity just call it a coin-flip, and payouts where 1st is 2 x 2nd (reasonable, I think). So maths-wise, taking the coin-flip now is payout-neutral (we make the same money in the long run by making the call). But if you're playing against a really poor player in this scenario, wouldn't everyone here expect to beat that player more than 1 in 2? I reckon most players would say they'd win at least 7 out of 10. By taking the coin-flip you're playing right into the bad players hands, and presenting him with the most profitable situation he can get, so this is bad for you. You're losing money. There's nothing wrong with folding here, I think.

But again it's just an expected-value consideration, or at least that's how I see it. But you've brought your own skill level v the opponent into the equation, so maybe this is the point jimbling is trying to get across? But I think this is all covered in TPFAP by Sklansky.

Thank you lenny.... that is exactly my point. You have a better chance of beating your opponent if you don't take this immediate edge.
Oh how I wish i could portray it so simply.
I have not read TPFAP SKlansky... perhaps I should

lenny_leonard wrote:

Another thing, I think it's a mistake to just dismiss any topic without really thinking about it. For example a few months ago everyone was laughing at the old 'betting for information' myth, but Sklansky has a very good take on it in his NL book with Miller, which I think has changed peoples thinking on the matter. He also gives a very good discussion on buying in short into cash games, whereas the general belief previously was that you should always buy in deep.

This is something I think this forum is drastically missing. I've learned loads from here, but it's always from hand analysis etc etc. Whats the best way to play this and that. sometimes these do get very interesting, but generally it's the same old thing. There is not enough theory discussions here. I think people are very capable of having them (not including me:rolleyes: ), but sometimes, just sometimes, people seem a bit closed off to discussing anything new/different.

marius

ntlbell wrote:

If I think I'm ahead I call/push whatever the case maybe.
If I think I'm behind I fold/bluf whatever the case maybe
MY TLS is never a factor in any hand I play.

If other people play differently based on TLS that's their choice.

I'm not saying TLS doesn't exist. It does, and pretty glad it does as people who worry about TLS are very easy to play against.

My point is, it SHOULD NOT.

So I'm not sure what your point is.

My point. *I* do not take *MY* TL into consideration in the play of a hand.

Your point. Other people do.

That's great we know this.

Now back to the topic.

I was asking you a question - not making a point (see original post...)

ntlbell

marius wrote:

I was asking you a question - not making a point (see original post...)

What are you wearing?

marius

ntlbell wrote:

What are you wearing?

You gonna buy me dinner?

ntlbell

marius wrote:

You gonna buy me dinner?

If you play your cards right.


har har har

Solksjaer

ntlbell wrote:

If you play your cards right.


har har har

Mods lock this thread before these boys do something they will regret.

I vote A by the way Jibbles. (and I'm not a fish)