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

jimbling

ocallagh wrote:

Ok, i see the point you are making.. basically if you and another player are on equal chip stacks, according to the formula above you are both worth exactly the same in $. You say this does not hold true, because you may be a far superior player than the other guy so you should be rewarded with extra $ when calculating your stacks exact $ worth.

However, if you are a far superior player surely you'd have a bigger chip stack!!! And if you did have a bigger chip stack you would be rewarded by the second half of the formula. The formula above takes into account an instance in one tournament, and not the results of previous hand or previous tournaments. I can hear you saying "But what if I just got uncluky in one hand to leave me short stacked... surely I deserve some compensation for that in the formula above". I disagree with that. Luck evens out in the long run, there may be some times when you will get lucky. Should the formula deduct $'s from you if you got lucky in a previous hand? In the long run if you are a superior player then your stack will generally be bigger and you will be rewarded for it in the formula. For that reason I don't think skill, focus or previous tournament results should be taken into account in the formula.

hmmm... interesting point, but I'm not sure I agree with it in full. let me rephrase slightly.

Lets completely exclude any luck whatsoever, you're correct there, that should even itself out.
Your current chip stack represents your favourable conditions up to this point in the tournament. It does not however represent the favourable conditions going forward in the tournament.
When the clients are using the formula they don't have to consider this as the tournament is no longer in existence. But for your decision it is slightly different. The tournament is continuing, so these factors should be taken into account.


It is important to note I am not only talking about this in order to increase the reasons to fold.. it can equally be used to increase the reasons to call. The $ value can be deducted also.

jimbling

actually niall... thinking about it might be right there. The chip stack could be considered the proportional factor of your favourable conditions..... doesn't matter if its past present or future. hmmm... ya think thats right.

mewso

I do like the naysayers here though proudly declaring it means dot to them and that playing against players who take elimination from a tournament into consideration is easy. Completely wrong imo. I take it into consideration along with all other factors. I might consider folding a coin toss for example if it's for all my chips but if I am playing one of these great players who loves playing against the likes of me I am unlikely to consider it a coin toss because their attitude is a factor. They are unlikely to have a strong hand so my calculations will be different. It's very dangerous to peg someone as easy to push off a hand until you know how good/bad they are and the fact that they don't put all their chips in on a coin toss does not mean they will see things the same way when you decide to push this weakling off a hand.
I think poker (tourney poker in particular) is all about making decisions and I like to use every piece of information in making that decision. A few assume this means they are "scared", "worried" of/about elimination but this isn't the case at all. Perhaps it is in some cases but my point is that you can't just sweepingly state that anybody who does consider elimination in making decisions is a fish or easy to play against. Dangerous mistake.

ntlbell

musician wrote:

I do like the naysayers here though proudly declaring it means dot to them and that playing against players who take elimination from a tournament into consideration is easy. Completely wrong imo. I take it into consideration along with all other factors. I might consider folding a coin toss for example if it's for all my chips but if I am playing one of these great players who loves playing against the likes of me I am unlikely to consider it a coin toss because their attitude is a factor. They are unlikely to have a strong hand so my calculations will be different. It's very dangerous to peg someone as easy to push off a hand until you know how good/bad they are and the fact that they don't put all their chips in on a coin toss does not mean they will see things the same way when you decide to push this weakling off a hand.
I think poker (tourney poker in particular) is all about making decisions and I like to use every piece of information in making that decision. A few assume this means they are "scared", "worried" of/about elimination but this isn't the case at all. Perhaps it is in some cases but my point is that you can't just sweepingly state that anybody who does consider elimination in making decisions is a fish or easy to play against. Dangerous mistake.

Not sure where you're getting this "proudly declaring" from.

It looks like you're not fully understanding the point.

This is not a case of player A is mad man and has no fear.

The simple fact is you should never EVER do or not do something because your TL is at risk it should never be a factor in any part of the hand.

The only time I can think of it where it comes into is the usuall there's 9 people left and there's 8 tickets to blah blah blah nonsense.

If you have AJ and a tight player pushes from UTG he has you covered you should not call because you're probably in bad shape. you're not NOT calling because you're worried about your TL.

Bar the sattelite situation can you give a realistic situation where you don't make a call/raise/push/bluff or any other action because your TL is at risk.

It's just doesn't make any sense to me.

I do care if I get knocked out of a tournament or not but this never has any baring on how I play my hand at that given moment and if it does then you shouldn't be playing tournies.

ocallagh

ntlbell wrote:

Not sure where you're getting this "proudly declaring" from.

It looks like you're not fully understanding the point.

This is not a case of player A is mad man and has no fear.

The simple fact is you should never EVER do or not do something because your TL is at risk it should never be a factor in any part of the hand.

The only time I can think of it where it comes into is the usuall there's 9 people left and there's 8 tickets to blah blah blah nonsense.

If you have AJ and a tight player pushes from UTG he has you covered you should not call because you're probably in bad shape. you're not NOT calling because you're worried about your TL.

Bar the sattelite situation can you give a realistic situation where you don't make a call/raise/push/bluff or any other action because your TL is at risk.

It's just doesn't make any sense to me.

I do care if I get knocked out of a tournament or not but this never has any baring on how I play my hand at that given moment and if it does then you shouldn't be playing tournies.

I disagree and agree:)

Firstly, like you I will never ever pass up a +EV move in any game I play.... In a cash game determining whether a move is +EV or not is easy. All the chips have the same value. In a tournament it is more complicated. All the chips have different values. Basically, a 100 chip in your 4k stack is worth more than a 100 chip in your opponents 8k stack. Your 100 chip is worth more because of your tournament life. To determine whether a situation is +EV or not you need to take into consideration tournament life.

bops

interesting thread Jim.

I voted A

i rather steer clear of small edges for large proportions of my chips (unless its at a crapshot stage). I rather take luck out of the equation!

Many players will take any edge (51/49) - you often find them at the bar moaning about how they called an AI in level 1 with TT and the other fella turned up AQ and hit a Q on the river...oh so unlucky...yep you were ahead...aint you great!!

...on the other hand the next week the same guy sits down to the FT with 40% of the CIP - after winning all his races.

There are a couple of well known guys who post here who will take the smallest of edges - they have won big tourneys and have been in the first few out in many many others...you know who you are!!

i dunno - live by the sword i suppose? - it just aint me though!!

than again if i was a lucky tosser i'd call - but i don't win races - i'd rather play poker

Many people think that "good" players will avoid small edges and wait for better spots - but many of the pro's will take any edge.

Many players think that people who consider TLS and easy targets who play too tight - which i suppose is fair enough, but you all seen the one when the guy steals your bb 3 times in a row and on the fourth you RRAI and you're back to where you started - or mr blind stealer calls and is a 5/1 dog - woof woof!!

The bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with either method - just differing styles

nice debate tho!
gl

Lazare

ntlbell wrote:

Bar the sattelite situation can you give a realistic situation where you don't make a call/raise/push/bluff or any other action because your TL is at risk.

It's just doesn't make any sense to me.

I do care if I get knocked out of a tournament or not but this never has any baring on how I play my hand at that given moment and if it does then you shouldn't be playing tournies.

This is where this whole argument is getting confused I think.

In tournaments there are times when you'll make an unorthodox decision, but it's because it's +EV to do so at that time, whereas those same decisions just don't occur in a ring game. (this was the original argument)

I do agree Brian though, getting knocked out should never be a reason to turn down a +EV decision.

Lazare

bops wrote:

Many players will take any edge (51/49) - you often find them at the bar moaning about how they called an AI in level 1 with TT and the other fella turned up AQ and hit a Q on the river...oh so unlucky...yep you were ahead...aint you great!!

gl

I would take this race every single time, and twice on Sundays.
If a Q hit, so be it.
You've a shot at doubling your stack in the first level and you'd pass it up?

Bops, that's madness.

bops

here's one for ya:

FT in big tourney:
Payout:
1 100k
2 65k
3 50k
4 40k
5 30k
6 25k
7 20k
8 15k
9 10k

9 handed - even stacks.

UTG pushes AI
everybody calls!!!!

you look down at AA on BB :eek:

Your move????


...me fold everytime!!

ntlbell

bops wrote:

here's one for ya:

FT in big tourney:
Payout:
1 100k
2 65k
3 50k
4 40k
5 30k
6 25k
7 20k
8 15k
9 10k

9 handed - even stacks.

UTG pushes AI
everybody calls!!!!

you look down at AA on BB :eek:

Your move????


...me fold everytime!!

I think the next person who posts another one of these moronic situations should be banned.

Bops I love you.

bops

ntlbell wrote:

I think the next person who posts another one of these moronic situations should be banned.

Bops I love you.

...you just posted it again - duh!!

love u too
kissey kissey

bops

Lazare wrote:

I would take this race every single time, and twice on Sundays.
If a Q hit, so be it.
You've a shot at going broke in the first level and you'd pass it up?

Bops, that's madness.

...slightly ammended

as I said the bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with either method - just differing styles...hence the arguement

Rnger

i got an OT question about bops' situation just there. This is a ruling Q i guess

Supose your AA does lose, one player wins all the chips, but your hand is (say) 3rd best... do you get thrid prize? Or, because you all went out in the same hand, do you all get 2nd and divide the remaining money evenly? This situation almost occured for me once before in a 3-way all-in.

I voted the first option. I would fold QQ everytime against AK in the first hand of the wsop me. Time and effort of actually making it to the tourney come into account for me.

ocallagh

Lazare wrote:

I do agree Brian though, getting knocked out should never be a reason to turn down a +EV decision.

I fully agree with this too.

Lazare

bops wrote:

...slightly ammended

as I said the bottom line is that there is nothing wrong with either method - just differing styles...hence the arguement

I disagree, worrying about your "tournament life" ten minutes into a tournament is wrong.

mewso

ntlbell wrote:

Not sure where you're getting this "proudly declaring" from.

I'm just getting more and more irked by some posts here that add absolutely nothing to the discussion but that may just because I'm tired and not in a good mood. Just a few one-liners every now and again that don't seem to be aimed at playing any constructive role here other than to appear clever. Not necessarily meaning you Brian

ntlbell wrote:

The simple fact is you should never EVER do or not do something because your TL is at risk it should never be a factor in any part of the hand.

My problem with this is it is too sweeping. If I have a 52/48 situation early in a deep stacked tournament with no knowledge of my opponent I may fold. This assumes I know for certain I am 52/48. I'm much more concerned about the uncertainty that you have to deal with in the early stages of a tournament. The threat of elimination becames a part of the equation for me. Assume some genius has calculated that when a player you don't know pushes on the first hand of a tournament and you have AK then you are a 52/48 favorite enough of the time to warrant a call. I won't call. I will let the threat of elimination be the deciding factor here filling the gap of uncertainty for me. Later when I know hes a donkey I'll be calling so fast my arm will fall off. I will put my chips in on marginal edges every time later on in that same tournament.

ntlbell wrote:

If you have AJ and a tight player pushes from UTG he has you covered you should not call because you're probably in bad shape. you're not NOT calling because you're worried about your TL.

And therefore nothing to do with this discussion. i.e. coin tosses, threat of elimination and when you might let that threat form part of your decision. At least thats what I thought the discussion was about. If I'm wrong fair enough.

ntlbell wrote:

I do care if I get knocked out of a tournament or not but this never has any baring on how I play my hand at that given moment and if it does then you shouldn't be playing tournies.

This "you shouldn't be playing tournies" statement. Sorry Brian I'm going to keep playing tournies regardless of who might tell me I shouldn't be. To sum up the hand I fold because it's for my tourney life:-

First hand in a large buy-in (meaning good pay-out not increased fear) and unknown donkey pushes UTG, I look down and see AKo. I fold. Now rip me to shreds.

mewso

Lazare wrote:

I do agree Brian though, getting knocked out should never be a reason to turn down a +EV decision.

See I agree that if you know 100% that it's +EV then a call is warranted but sitting at a table when put to a decision for my chips my thoughts might be the following:-

Well knowing little about this guy I would say he has a strong Ace 40% of the time say AJ+, maybe a good medium pocket pair %40 of the time and JJ+ the other 20% of the time and I have AK so let me see theres 4520 in the pot and I have to call 2200 so I'm getting approx. 2-1, hey that bit was easy. Anway that means that if I divide by blah multiply by blah, subtract blah then blah amount of the time I win such and such an amount and sometimes I lose another such and such amount....

"clock"

...but not forgetting 20% of the time I'm a big dog so thats 40 times blah + blah means I win x y amount of the time but lose z j amount of the time so putting it all together. Oh wait what about the medium pair the last 40% well that means once I multiply xyz by apples and oranges and subtract my life expentancy I win 20 bananas half the time but lose an elephant 75% of the time so totalling all that up I think it's a ....

"Sir your hand has been folded"

Oh to hell with it I'll ask on boards later.

More realistically my thoughts might be early in a tourney

What is this donkey at? He just pushed in the first hand of the tourney and I have AK. Well I've seen many players do this with AA before but if he really is a donkey it could be a small pair or even AQ. Well it's for all my chips though so I can wait and figure out this guy a bit more so I fold.

and then later in a tournament

O.k. I've played with this guy for a while and I know hes doing this with medium pairs and AJ+ most of the time and the odd time with JJ+. I have AK which means I am ahead or in a good coin-flip situation most of the time but dead the odd time. Well worth the call to double my stack now and have a good chance of going all the way. I call

ntlbell

musician wrote:

I'm just getting more and more irked by some posts here that add absolutely nothing to the discussion but that may just because I'm tired and not in a good mood. Just a few one-liners every now and again that don't seem to be aimed at playing any constructive role here other than to appear clever. Not necessarily meaning you Brian

Yes yes my sniping one liners get very boring.

musician wrote:

This "you shouldn't be playing tournies" statement. Sorry Brian I'm going to keep playing tournies regardless of who might tell me I shouldn't be. To sum up the hand I fold because it's for my tourney life:-

I didn't mean you Brian shouldn't be playing tournies.

Anyone who turns down +EV situtaions and the reason for making the fold is TLS shouldn't bother turning up in the first place.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

ntlbell

I agree totally.

I'm not sure why he needed complicated math's to work it out, most good tournies players will take races early on for this exact reason.

I see a lot of people voting for taken TLS into consideration but not a lot posting as to WHY.

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.

Lazare

musician wrote:

See I agree that if you know 100% that it's +EV then a call is warranted but sitting at a table when put to a decision for my chips my thoughts might be the following:-What is this donkey at? He just pushed in the first hand of the tourney and I have AK. Well I've seen many players do this with AA before but if he really is a donkey it could be a small pair or even AQ. Well it's for all my chips though so I can wait and figure out this guy a bit more so I fold.

Brian, this is the crux of the issue. This highlights the difference between cash and tournaments when deciding the EV of a decision.
Calling with AK against an UTG all in from an unknown in the first level of a tournament is imo +EV. The decision has very little to do with odds, as they are totally unknown to me, it's because I'm factoring in the damage I can possibly do with double my starting stack this early in the tourney.
Basically, your decisions in a tournament should factor in a lot more than 'Is my hand ahead of his range here'

mewso

Lazare wrote:

your decisions in a tournament should factor in a lot more than 'Is my hand ahead of his range here'

Would I be right then that everyone who votes not to take elimination into consideration is calling here with AK v xx in the first hand? I would hope so.

Those who mock taking elimination into account can take either option in this situation. You can say I put him on xx and I'm ahead of xx so it's an auto-call or you can say I put him on AA-KK and folded. imo you have no real basic for putting them on AA-KK so basically you guys better be calling here every time. Me, I'll just say I was 100% certain he had AA-KK, save face and nobody will tell me not to play tournaments ever again.

ntlbell

musician wrote:

Me, I'll just say I was 100% certain he had AA-KK, save face and nobody will tell me not to play tournaments ever again.

Don't turn this into something it isn't Brian.

Lazare

musician wrote:

Would I be right then that everyone who votes not to take elimination into consideration is calling here with AK v xx in the first hand? I would hope so.
Those who mock taking elimination into account can take either option in this situation. You can say I put him on xx and I'm ahead of xx so it's an auto-call or you can say I put him on AA-KK and folded. imo you have no real basic for putting them on AA-KK so basically you guys better be calling here every time. Me, I'll just say I was 100% certain he had AA-KK, save face and nobody will tell me not to play tournaments ever again.

I'm just explaining my thinking as to why I'd call, others may have different reasons to fold or call.

For what it's worth, I've played with you a couple of times and watched you a couple more, and would not consider myself a better player than you, so I do respect your opinion here Brian.

mewso

ntlbell wrote:

Don't turn this into something it isn't Brian.

Oh come on now you don't think that was a serious line. Dear oh dear. Amazing what can happen when you forget a smiley.

mewso

Lazare wrote:

I'm just explaining my thinking as to why I'd call, others may have different reasons to fold or call.

For what it's worth, I've played with you a couple of times and watched you a couple more, and would not consider myself a better player than you, so I do respect your opinion here Brian.

Sorry yeah I probably should have been clearer. In general I agree with your decision (or your reasoning) to call as with others who disagree with taking elimination into consideration. In general I'm on similar ground I just believe there are moments and in this one I think my reason for folding is not a bad play. While I enjoy flattery don't make the mistake of thinking someone is a better player than you. I would consider myself a seriously average player these days mainly because I play so infrequently. I geniunely enjoy these discussions and don't take any offence from any of you guys. I've met ye and respect your opinion. All of my firends call me arguementative but I don't mean nothing by it, honest guv.

Anyway musician retires........

off to bed. Night.

boba_fett3099

I have to say that im folding the QQ vs AK a large amount of the time. For example: Jackpot 20 F/O - I consider myself to be in the top 10% of the field and am confident that i can benefit from my opponents mistakes by playing some post-flop poker with them. Why should i take a race here against inferior opposition?? This is surely passing up a skill edge. On the other hand: EPT Dublin ME - I would consider myself to be probably in the bottom 25 - 30% of the field i call every time. Im surprised to hear that most pros would take a race here as this seems to be passing up your skill edge and 50% of the time your eliminated and the other 50% of the time you have increased your chances of winning the tournament by approx 1%...Doesn't seem worth it to me but maybe im a fish also.

Lazare

boba_fett3099 wrote:

I have to say that im folding the QQ vs AK a large amount of the time. For example: Jackpot 20 F/O - I consider myself to be in the top 10% of the field and am confident that i can benefit from my opponents mistakes by playing some post-flop poker with them. Why should i take a race here against inferior opposition?? This is surely passing up a skill edge. On the other hand: EPT Dublin ME - I would consider myself to be probably in the bottom 25 - 30% of the field i call every time. Im surprised to hear that most pros would take a race here as this seems to be passing up your skill edge and 50% of the time your eliminated and the other 50% of the time you have increased your chances of winning the tournament by approx 1%...Doesn't seem worth it to me but maybe im a fish also.

What if you play in 100 €20 Jackpot tournaments, and you take that race everytime?

50 times you lose €20 (€1000)
50 times you double up, and use your skill edge to go on and win say 50% of the time and cash 25%, the other 25% you lose another €250.

Which decision has the higher EV?

LuckyLloyd

This post has been deleted.