meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 2 months |
| seen | May 4 at 7:23 | |
| stats | profile views | 1 |
|
Mar 21 |
awarded | Yearling |
|
Feb 25 |
comment |
Add-on value and “bubble factor” I must have not made my point clear enough - I'm not expecting a bubble factor, but rather "tighten up extremely because your stack is more expensive to rebuy than the value compared to the addon" factor... |
|
Feb 12 |
asked | Add-on value and “bubble factor” |
|
Feb 5 |
awarded | Notable Question |
|
Jan 28 |
comment |
Profitability of re-buys/add-ons when allowed @Chris: Doesn't matter if re-buys are done at a flat rate (i.e. we're not considering the add-on phase here where a higher chip per dollar ratio could be offered) since a re-buy also contributes to the prize pool at a flat rate. Let's say you and I are playing against Phil Hellmuth in a re-buy tourney, and he just lost his stack. You and I both now each have 10K stacks => EV $100 if the main prize is $200. Now, if Phil re-buys and gets 1K chips for $10 that money goes into the prize pool. Both our EV is still $100 each! ICM calculation could become less linear with more than just 1st paying. |
|
Sep 28 |
awarded | Critic |
|
Aug 31 |
awarded | Nice Question |
|
Aug 26 |
comment |
Profitability of re-buys/add-ons when allowed Interesting point - assuming the two big stacks follow optimal strategy and don't enter direct confrontation, survival odds of the short stack are slim. At the same time I believe the structure allowing rebuys on the bubble to be completely unreasonable, especially for a flat payout structure. |
|
Aug 26 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Aug 26 |
comment |
Profitability of re-buys/add-ons when allowed @Macro: afaik this is a pretty common way of calculating your tournament equity - and yes, I'm almost certain the assumption is inaccurate (most notably, fear/fold equity is ignored) but I have no better alternative or a way to prove it. |
|
Jul 6 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Jun 4 |
revised |
Maximizing profit post-bubble bounty expired |
|
May 27 |
awarded | Promoter |
|
May 27 |
asked | What mnemonic rules are helpful in poker calculations? |
|
May 17 |
accepted | Online vs live tournament pace |
|
May 17 |
accepted | Online play analysis software |
|
May 17 |
accepted | Basic Strategy for Pokerstars ZOOM? |
|
May 16 |
comment |
Most common freerolling situations in holdem? @JeffreyBlake: that's exactly my thinking. And, since you can't confidently know if your opponent is drawing to such a hand, you can't know you're freerolling for a fact. As I speculated in the answer above, the term "free-rolling" could only be applied after the hands have been revealed, (somewhat similar to commenting on someone "drawing dead" - you can't know you're drawing dead until you see the opponent's cards... otherwise you wouldn't call would you? :) |
|
May 16 |
comment |
Most common freerolling situations in holdem? @JeffreyBlake: What about if you have a nut straight, are drawing to a nut flush but your opponent has three-of-a-kind and is drawing to full house or quads? Regardless of still having favourable odds, I don't believe this situation qualifies to be called a freeroll. Am I wrong? |
|
May 16 |
asked | Online play analysis software |
