Odds/Implied Odds in a tourney - math wiz needed...H Lederer Perhaps?

[govikings!!!]

A question or two for some of the math wizzes out there...

When does your decisionmaking change in a tourney and begin to not use
the chips in front of your opponent or the chips in the pot as the
actual "pot" odds, but switch to "Prize" odds?

example...Moneymaker and Farha heads up at the WSOP...assume for a
minute that both have the same number of chips in front of them.
Prize structure was about $2.5M v $1.0M. If it were me, I would be
using the 2.5-1 odds as whether to decide on a move. (of course this
is simplistic, but i need to make sense out of this).

If the chips were 2.5-1 in favor on Moneymaker, would that change
either persons decisionmaking if they were going to try to play
mathematically against the prize? Would Moneymaker use the prize of
2.5-1 or because he had more chips does he use farha's smaller stack
for any odds he is going to make a decision with.

I just wanted more clarification on how to figure your pot odds when
you are using tourney chips and the real money is not exactly on the
table.

If it is correct to use the 2.5-1 as the odds, then if you were going
to only play the number, then calling an all in after the flop on just
a 4 flush would be correct? (1.9-1)

This makes sense to me, but maybe I am completely wrong. I did read
an article from Howard Lederer where he regretted not playing a hand
and he used the prize structure to explain why maybe he made a bad
decision (I think it was the WSOP) he explained that he was getting
better odds because losing in 40th place was not that different from
20th place (or something like that) and that the prize money went way
up at the final table, so he maybe should have gone all in.

Thanks for any help. Spoody

[Paul Adams]

Hello. I'm NOT a mathematician, so my answer will be half-assed. I hope
this will do until someone smarter than me can offer a "full-assed" answer.

Anyway, I'm not sure you can do a perfect mathematical analysis of this
situation. But we do know one thing. The chips in the hands of a big
stack are less valuable, chip by chip, than the chips in the hands of a
short stack. For example, you don't want to go all-in against a big stack
on an "even money" bet (whereas it would be fine to do so in a real money
game). If you lose the even money bet, you're guaranteed to go out. If
you win, you double your stack, which is NOT a guarantee of improving your
final standing or gaining any real money.

So, I reckon that if you drew a graph to illustrate the "real" value of
your chips, chip to the dollar, you'd find it resembles a parabola.
Calculating the exact pot odds would probably take some kind of calculus.
And if you could perform this kind of calculation on the spot (unlike me,
who can't even figure pot odds in a real money game), I'm not sure what
you could do with the precise figure. Chances are you're against someone
who's playing on guts more than calculations at this point.

It's good to keep in mind the general concept that you need better pot
odds to justify calling with a short stack, and not quite so good pot odds
to justify calling with a big stack. But as you get later in the tourney
there are other factors, like the fire under your ass caused by the
escalating blinds that say "you must make a play." You're weighing the
problem of whether to take unfavorable pot odds or to lose to inevitable
attrition.

I think a true mathematical answer to the question of "what odds are being
offered," that might help decide between a bet, call or a fold, would have
to include:

-the relative size of all stacks still in play,
-the number of players remaining,
-the payout structure for the tournament in all its complexity,
-the opportunity cost of passing (since every hand "costs" in terms of the
blinds that come around and escalate).

Too many exponential factors to consider for a precise response! General
guidelines should help bring you close to the target, and experience
should improve your aim. And this ignores all human factors of
aggression, bluff, readability, etc.

_________________________________________________________________
Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com

[Grant Peacock]

In heads up play, all chips have the same value. Using your wsop
example below, each player already has 1M in the bank, so 1.5M is at
stake. If 8.4M chips are in play, then 1 chip is worth about 18
cents. There are no more "chips changing value."

The concept to which you are referring applies when there is money to
be made by waiting for other people to bust. In this situation, your
last chip is your most precious. The most extreme examples are things
like this: 3 handed, you are big blind with 1M chips, small blind has
2M chips, the button has 20K and will be all in when he posts his
blind next hand. Button folds, SB makes lets say a moderate raise.
You should play in an extremely conservative fashion, because by
folding you are almost guaranteed 2nd place money, whereas by getting
in a confrontation you increase your risk of coming 3rd.

In order to really calculate "pot odds" for big calls at the final
table with 3 or more people, you have to do more arithmetic and
guesstimating than most people would want to do. But the idea is that
gaining chips doesn't help you as much as losing chips hurts you.
This notion is only slightly true in early stages, and gets stronger
as the money gets closer.

[govikings!!!]

Wait please explain this then...and you possibly did but I cannot see
the forest for the trees here.

If both players have the same amount of chips at the end and are heads
up, and the winner gets $2.5M to the loser's $1M, I just cannot agree
with this. I dont care about losing, all I care about is making the
correct mathematical decision here. Lets say I am playing a real pro
and feel like I need to make one good stab at winning. Busting out
means nothing, because I will lose slowly otherwise. If I can call an
all in by the pro (or get him to call me), and I know that if I can
make my 4 flush (or open strait for that matter) I will win. Why am I
not getting 2.5-1 odds from the Prize? (Pot)? Isnt this kind of like
Implied odds? His chips-since they are all in-are worth $2.5 million
at that point...aren't they? So, I am putting up my $1M 2nd place
prize to win the $2.5M winners prize...so 2.5-1 odds...good enough
odds to go for a 4 Flush or Open Strait after the Flop.

Maybe I am off my rocker, but after reading a note from Howard Lederer
about getting better implied odds on a play only because if he won, he
would have a chance at the much higher winnings later in the tourney
got me thinking about this situation. Thanks, Spoods



"Gold Fish" <anonymous@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3f4e7acc$0$10485$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>...
> In your example, with two people, one person is going to get 2.5 million,
> and the other is going to get 1 million. That million is guaranteed for
> BOTH players, each one will make at least 1 million dollars (the casino
> could give them that million right away). And at this point in the story,
> the sum of what they are playing for is the 1.5 million difference. That
> is it. There are no odds to be calculated, it is just like a win or loss
> situation. They either walk away with the additional 1.5 million, or they
> don't, either way they get their 1 million for getting that far.
>
> The pot odds concept applies slightly if there are more then two players.
> Lets say there are three players, but only the number one player gets a
> prize (or the only decently large prize). Taking a risk and playing more
> aggressively might be called for in order to insure either 1st or 3rd.
> But there aren't extreme payouts like this in the wsop, each place gets a
> fair chunk higher then the place below them. I might tighten up if you?re
> about to make it into the money, but that?s about it. Other then that,
> only consider the chances of the hand you are in right now.
>
> There are books you can get on tournament play that can help you out more
> with this. Obviously in a tournament you can't play super tight, or else
> everyone around you will get huge stacks as players get knocked out, while
> your stack will remain unchanged. If you are a computer person like me
> you might also want to look into purchasing "Tournament Texas Hold'em For
> Windows"
> By Wilson Software.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com

[Jack Spratt]

Where's the 2.5-1 odds? Sounds like both players are putting up $1.5M each
to win $1.5M, or 1-1. You aren't putting up $1M, you've already won that and
so has the other player.

"govikings!!!" <spoody@spoody.com> wrote in message
news:1f885a93.0308300851.162c4295@posting.google.com...
> Wait please explain this then...and you possibly did but I cannot see
> the forest for the trees here.
>
> If both players have the same amount of chips at the end and are heads
> up, and the winner gets $2.5M to the loser's $1M, I just cannot agree
> with this. I dont care about losing, all I care about is making the
> correct mathematical decision here. Lets say I am playing a real pro
> and feel like I need to make one good stab at winning. Busting out
> means nothing, because I will lose slowly otherwise. If I can call an
> all in by the pro (or get him to call me), and I know that if I can
> make my 4 flush (or open strait for that matter) I will win. Why am I
> not getting 2.5-1 odds from the Prize? (Pot)? Isnt this kind of like
> Implied odds? His chips-since they are all in-are worth $2.5 million
> at that point...aren't they? So, I am putting up my $1M 2nd place
> prize to win the $2.5M winners prize...so 2.5-1 odds...good enough
> odds to go for a 4 Flush or Open Strait after the Flop.
>
> Maybe I am off my rocker, but after reading a note from Howard Lederer
> about getting better implied odds on a play only because if he won, he
> would have a chance at the much higher winnings later in the tourney
> got me thinking about this situation. Thanks, Spoods
>
>
>
> "Gold Fish" <anonymous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<3f4e7acc$0$10485$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>...
> > In your example, with two people, one person is going to get 2.5
million,
> > and the other is going to get 1 million. That million is guaranteed for
> > BOTH players, each one will make at least 1 million dollars (the casino
> > could give them that million right away). And at this point in the
story,
> > the sum of what they are playing for is the 1.5 million difference.
That
> > is it. There are no odds to be calculated, it is just like a win or
loss
> > situation. They either walk away with the additional 1.5 million, or
they
> > don't, either way they get their 1 million for getting that far.
> >
> > The pot odds concept applies slightly if there are more then two
players.
> > Lets say there are three players, but only the number one player gets a
> > prize (or the only decently large prize). Taking a risk and playing
more
> > aggressively might be called for in order to insure either 1st or 3rd.
> > But there aren't extreme payouts like this in the wsop, each place gets
a
> > fair chunk higher then the place below them. I might tighten up if
you?re
> > about to make it into the money, but that?s about it. Other then that,
> > only consider the chances of the hand you are in right now.
> >
> > There are books you can get on tournament play that can help you out
more
> > with this. Obviously in a tournament you can't play super tight, or
else
> > everyone around you will get huge stacks as players get knocked out,
while
> > your stack will remain unchanged. If you are a computer person like me
> > you might also want to look into purchasing "Tournament Texas Hold'em
For
> > Windows"
> > By Wilson Software.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Posted using RecPoker.com - http://www.recpoker.com