Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1231
  • Posts: 20410
September 30th, 2010 at 5:37:04 AM permalink
One of the best bets I have ever seen in my life was on the final table winner at the 2009 World Series of Poker. I don't remember the exact chip counts, but Darvin Moon was the dominant chip leader, and Phil Ivey was far behind. Pinnacle offered a prop on the winner, Moon vs. Ivey. Any other winner would result in a push. I strongly feel that at that level the probability of winning is proportional to the stack. However, all the squares were betting on Ivey, creating huge value on Moon. I don't remember the details, but I put the fair line on Moon laying roughly 7 to 1, and I had to lay 2 to 1, or something like that. In the end, it pushed, because neither won.

Unfortunately, this year no huge name made it to the final table. Pinnacle is not offering matchups, at least not yet, but you can bet on or against any player. The following table shows the chip counts, probability of winning (assuming it is proportional to chip count), the fair line to win, the Bodog and Pinnacle odds to win and Pinnacle odds to lose. You can't bet against a player at Bodog.

Player Chips Prob. Win Fair Line Bodog -- Yes Pinnacle -- Yes Pinnacle -- No
Jason Sentl 7,625,000 3.5% 2780 1600 1756 -4390
Joseph Cheong 23,525,000 10.7% 834 750 807 -1164
John Dolan 46,250,000 21.1% 375 350 361 -433
Jonathan Duhamel 65,975,000 30.0% 233 225 237 -274
Michael "The Grinder" Mizrachi 14,450,000 6.6% 1420 700 723 -1033
Matthew Jarvis 16,700,000 7.6% 1215 1000 922 -1431
John Racener 19,050,000 8.7% 1053 750 692 -1002
Filippo Candio 16,400,000 7.5% 1239 1000 1063 -1800
Cuong "Soi" Nguyen 9,650,000 4.4% 2176 1400 1309 -2296


The only strong bet is betting against Michael "The Grinder" Mizrachi . With a 6.6% chance to win, the fair line against him is -1423. However, you have to lay only 1033. That is a 2.46% advantage. Should you have a Pinnacle account I don't think it is worth tying up your money for, unless you are one of the fortunate ones to have a credit account.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 231
  • Posts: 6512
October 12th, 2010 at 4:24:17 PM permalink
The time off between the seating of the final table on July 17, and the resumption of play on November 6 creates an odd dynamic for a tournament. It is like starting a completely different tournament. With the amount of money on the line, I am certain paid "consultants", have been analyzing the field and "coaches" have been working with players to optimize their hand strategy given their various bankrolls. I wonder if the sponsors for these players are providing these services as part of their compensation to the players? Perhaps not since the same company is sponsoring many of them, but it would appear to be a good investment, since you want to have the person wearing your logos go as far as possible.

In terms of prior performance, Mizrachi has got to be the, "strongest" of the nine. However, I doubt that he has the chips to win it. It is interesting to note that three-quarters of the table is only one or two "all in's" against the chip leader to take the lead, including Mizrachi.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 12th, 2010 at 5:03:05 PM permalink
The squares overvalue Mizrachi in the same way they overvalued Ivey last year. As you note, the only thing that matters at this stage is chip count (we have to assume that anyone who got this far is highly skilled). The skill factor is further minimized by the fact that practically everyone is short-stacked at this point, in terms of M (cost/orbit).

I think that there might be another, hidden dynamic that could affect the outcome--relative percentage of a player that "belongs" to someone else. Someone who sold, say, 50% of himself to another might be kicking himself to have done so at this stage (a la Jamie Gold). He might also feel a bit more reckless, knowing that he will only receive half of the prize money he wins anyway (BUT, be taxed on the entire amount!!!). The lesser the percentage a player owns of himself, the more he might be playing for just the bracelet. Of course, there's no way any but an insider would know this information.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1231
  • Posts: 20410
October 13th, 2010 at 9:12:12 PM permalink
I predict most of these players will receive only a fraction of the prize money, because they made prize-sharing deals long ago with lots of other players who are already out of it. However, I don't think they will throw the tournament for tax reasons. They will 1099 anybody who they have to make a check out to. It is standard procedure. Au contraire, I think they will try to win, not for the money, but for the fame and bargaining power to ask for more from the Internet poker sites to wear their hat (ahem).
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 13th, 2010 at 11:30:23 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I predict most of these players will receive only a fraction of the prize money, because they made prize-sharing deals long ago with lots of other players who are already out of it. However, I don't think they will throw the tournament for tax reasons. They will 1099 anybody who they have to make a check out to. It is standard procedure. Au contraire, I think they will try to win, not for the money, but for the fame and bargaining power to ask for more from the Internet poker sites to wear their hat (ahem).



In turn, fueled by the poker public's mistaken impression that anyone who got that far did so by any other method than being the luckbox of all time for seven or eight days. I was just watching the latest ESPN episode of the WSOP. There were about 54 players left, and the average stack was less than 20 orbits' worth of chips! This was absurd--just about everyone was short-stacked! To give you a contrast, the initial starting stacks at the beginning of the tournament contained enough chips for 750 orbits! Obviously, the WSOP organizers (Harrah's!) just want to get it all over with, thus reducing their overhead, and making that much more $$$$. But a poker tournament, this isn't--it's more like tiddlywinks when the blinds and antes get so big that it just becomes a shove-fest, like the local $25 buyin nightly donkathon at Bugling Elk Casino and Bingo Parlor.

It's like the Masters being played over two holes, or the baseball World Series being decided by one five-inning game. Ridiculous.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1231
  • Posts: 20410
November 5th, 2010 at 4:30:47 PM permalink
It is time to revisit this topic, with the tournament to resume on Saturday.

Here are the stacks, probability of winning, and fair odds.

Player Chips Prob. Win Fair Line
Jonathan Duhamel 65,975,000 30.04% 233
John Dolan 46,250,000 21.06% 375
Joseph Cheong 23,525,000 10.71% 834
John Racener 19,050,000 8.67% 1053
Matthew Jarvis 16,700,000 7.60% 1215
Filippo Candio 16,400,000 7.47% 1239
Michael Mizrachi 14,450,000 6.58% 1420
Soi Nguyen 9,650,000 4.39% 2176
Jason Senti 7,625,000 3.47% 2780


I just got two good bets at Pinnacle. One was on Jonathan Duhamel at +269 (fair at +233), and against Michael Mizrachi at -807 (fair at -1420). It seems Mizrachi is getting the most media exposure, and thus the most bets on him, creating value on the no. I'd keep an eye on bets against him. Much the same ways there were great bets against Phil Ivy last year.

An interesting set of bets is player to be eliminted first at Bodog. Does anyone know an easy formula for that? I could see going through all 10! exact orders of elimination, but would be very tedious.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
November 9th, 2010 at 7:16:35 AM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1231
  • Posts: 20410
November 9th, 2010 at 7:28:13 AM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

1st. Jonathan Duhamel $8,944,310



Note that I won my two bets mentioned in my last post. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
November 9th, 2010 at 7:29:28 AM permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
teddys
teddys
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5441
November 9th, 2010 at 9:00:59 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Note that I won my two bets mentioned in my last post. YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Haha, there is some disconnect between your post and your signature there, Wiz! LOL.

(How can you not be happy when you win, though?! Congrats!)
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4

  • Jump to: