Quote:Mission146Yeah, I don't really have to get into any sophisticated (or unsophisticated) math to know the pot odds are on my side with this one. No matter how you cut it, if everyone has an equal amount of money and I have AA, I would be expected to profit.

.

By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?

In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%

Quote:winningwizard$500 buy in tournament 500 people.....you table has 10 seats. very first hand of the tournament, you are big blind and you have AA....entire table is all you call or fold? its obvious call for me, but is there anyone out there that would fold?

You are getting better than 9-1 for your all in call. You will win more than 31% of the time against 9 random opponents who showdown to the river. I would make this call.

Quote:michael99000By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?

In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%

Expectation refers to the long term. If you were in this situation over and over again, would you expect a net win or net loss? Mission is saying he’d expect a net win.

Quote:RSExpectation refers to the long term. If you were in this situation over and over again, would you expect a net win or net loss? Mission is saying he’d expect a net win.

I understood that.

So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.

But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out

Quote:beachbumbabsSo, if you fold, someone else is going to knock out 8 or maybe 7 others. Unless there's a big bounty, why not let them all kill each other? I'd fold.

Even if there is a big bounty, against 7 or 8 other hands Aces cannot be a favorite to win. There are simply too many possibilities. Think of it like playing Omaha; the more cards are in play the more likely it is that something will connect to make at least a five card pat hand if one is possible. Roughly 2 in 5 five card boards pairs. With 16 cards in play it is almost assured someone will have three of a kind if the board pairs.

Also, the bounty doesn't matter for the tournament position. Yes, it is nice to collect the cash bonus but if I am a decent player I would rather get heads up against a deep stack that got lucky than grind my way through a field to face two or three good players at the end.

It doesn't matter if you are ever in the exact same situation agian. It's all the unusual situations added together over your lifetime that count. If you are gambling there's lot's of unusual situations that come up(they may not look unusual but they actually are). Are you going to keep tossing away value because you think it's an unusual situation? It's a slippery slope. Next thing you know you are not holding unusual VP hands that you should, playing unusual hands on table games wrong, and so on, and so on.Quote:michael99000I understood that.

So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.

But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out

Win or lose it's nice knowing that happened while making the correct play.

Quote:michael99000I understood that.

So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.

But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out

I'm basing my response on the assumption shoving with AA pre is +EV.

So what happens when you're in some other unusual situation? Do you think, "Ah, I can only do this once, maybe twice, then never again. I shouldn't do it!" No, of course not. Every situation is an isolated event, but it's the culmination of all events that matter. I don't remember the exact situation, but once on 100-play VP (or maybe 50-play? I don't remember), I got dealt 4 to the royal and I said, "Watch, I bet I'm not gonna hit any royals!" My friend offered odds on that giving me an advantage and I took it. Am I ever gonna have that situation come up again? That particular situation, no.

But a few years ago, I was playing some single line VP and my (other) friend came over to me and I said how horribly I'd been running and that I hadn't converted 2 pair into a FH in what seemed like forever. He offered me good odds (I think 11-to-1) on my next 2pair not turning into a FH. I'm clearly the underdog (less likely to win) but it was +EV for me, so I took the bet. I actually took the bet I think 10 times or so....and lost each one. :(

Remember when Mayweather was fighting that retard from Ireland? Again, once in a lifetime situation. That specific situation, or any situation similar to it, isn't too likely to come up again. Even though I was betting on the favorite (Mayweather), do you think I thought, "Well shoot, if I lose this bet, then it's unlikely that I get more bets like this. So I just won't bet it!" ? No, of course not. I bet a decent amount on Mayweather.

I'm sure I've made a bunch of different bets that were all very unique and unlikely to come up again. But that's no reason to not make the bets (assuming they're +EV). If I had a 25% chance to win 9x my bet, or whatever the case is in the poker example (assuming cash game), then yeah, I'm gonna make that bet. This time it might be some poker hand, next time it might be some team wins the super bowl, or whatever else. If it's +EV, then you should bet it (assuming it's within your risk tolerance).

A caveat, of course, is if this is a tournament, where strategy and EV are very different.

If that’s how you analyze poker situations, then you will be a long term poker loser. Hella +EV spot and its an insta call in a cash game.Quote:michael99000I understood that.

So yes, if you call over and over again in this situation than in the long run you’ll win often enough to make it a good play.

But how about when you’re in a very unusual situation, like this one, that will probably never present itself again. Doesn’t that have to be taken into account? This is a one time event, with about a 26% chance of winning. You’ll never have the chance to play it out enough times to see the expected profit. So you have to consider do you want to make a play that has a 74% chance of knocking you out

Quote:michael99000By “expected to profit”, do you mean just that your odds of winning are better than the other 8 people? Or that you think your odds of winning are greater than 50% ?

In my mind, expecting something to happen means there’s a greater than 50/50 chance of it happening . In this case, your odds of winning are better than everyone else’s but still less than 50%

I mean that, on average (probably barring another AA) you have a greater probability to win the pot than any other individual person. You should have the best probability to win the pot, but it is under 50% in almost all cases.

Suppose your probability of winning is 20% and there are nine people in the pot (yourself included) and each has $1,000 in the pot. That’s $9,000 total, so you either profit $8,000 or lose $1,000.

(8000 * .2) - ($1000 * .8) = $800

Ergo, an expected profit of $800.

Quote:Mission146I mean that, on average (probably barring another AA) you have a greater probability to win the pot than any other individual person. You should have the best probability to win the pot, but it is under 50% in almost all cases.

Suppose your probability of winning is 20% and there are nine people in the pot (yourself included) and each has $1,000 in the pot. That’s $9,000 total, so you either profit $8,000 or lose $1,000.

(8000 * .2) - ($1000 * .8) = $800

Ergo, an expected profit of $800.

Yes, but if you are not playing for cash (tournament like this example), the most likely event is to be knocked out of the tournament. Whereas folding keeps your stack, and keeps you in the game while many others get knocked out (making you last longer, and getting better prizes).

Also, even though this is hypothetical, if everyone ahead of you went all in, there is a good chance that they all have good hands (very little chance of a bluff after maybe the first spot), so there are at least 7 very strong hands (possibly another AA). For a whole table to go all in, there would be maybe one bluff, followed by all very strong hands, or all very strong hands. I can't see how in a tournament it would ever be worth calling.

I have never seen 9 players all go all in, but for that to happen, everyone would have to be very confident with their hands (meaning you are going against many strong hands, possibly another AA).