Poker Discussion
|
|
Please help support pocketfives by using our links when choosing to download a new site!
CarbonPoker · Full Tilt · Cake Poker · PokerStars · Ultimate Bet · Players Only · Bodog
|
I have always been willing to play rebuy tourneys without much concern as to how much $ I am spending (otherwise I would just put myself in lower buy-in tourneys if I weren´t completely comfortable) so long as almost every time I finish the first hour with a healthy, above avg stack, and sometimes I am superstacked. I am curious if I am taking this a bit too far or not in the $109rebuy???? as quite often I spend around $1,000 or more in this tourney, and can even near $2k here and there if i run horrid. Keep in mind, sometimes I hit early and double or triple immediately, and it only costs $309 total for the tourney, bringing my avg down. I know the value of a nice stack is near priceless in tourneys, because all I really play for is top 3(which is where all the +EV lies anyway). What are your thoughts on if I should try to approach this in a way that lowers my avg investment by perhaps $400ish, but also lowers my avg 1st break stack by 3,000 chips, or so?? The purest answer would probably be found by keeping records on how much I spend each time, and making calculations....but what are your thoughts???
Please give a detailed reason if possible to whichever opinions and thoughts you may have.
Much appreciated,
D´ Ry (not dry)
Danny
|
|
|
|
|
I'd say only draw the line if your approach is not working... I'm not sure what your stats are in the 100 rebuy, and im not about to look them up, but if you do as well as you do in other tournaments I'm sure your stats in the rebuy are sick too. I do not enjoy spending over 500 dollars in the 100 rebuy. It drive me crazy... and not because my bankroll can't handle it, but more because i get tilted out when i'm losing. I have won the rebuy twice, and both times i was in for 500 and 300... in fact i have never final tabled when in for more than 1k. IMO you are better off playing tight agressive in the first hour and picking your spots, rather than gambling for the purpose of chips.
|
|
|
|
E-mail Stars support for all of your tourney results in Excel format. They will show all the rebuys in a seperate column. You can use the file to accurately calculate your ROI.
|
|
|
This is a very good question and one I've pondered often but been too lazy to put in the work to analyze my data very thoroughly as the software i use to track my results is not very good about filtering on various buy-ins or tourneys. So, thank you for prodding me to export my data into excel and do a little investigation.
Unfortunately, I don't have one very relevant piece of data which is very important and would be very interesting to see some statistics if anyone has tracked this, but stack size at the end of rebuy is an essential piece of information in order to draw any conclusions. Both in how it correlates to average buy-in and to average profit(which of course will be different for everyone).
Having said that I think it's also important to realize that ROI is very misleading in general(except when used to derive a more significant number such as average profit) but especially in rebuy tourneys. Here is a specific example derived from my data in the Stars 100r's over the last 18 months or so:
over 55 tourneys where i was in for $309 i had and ROI of 178% and average profit of $550.
over 29 touneys where i was in for $709 i ahd an ROI of 97% and average profit of $689.
over 16 tourneys where i was in for $1109 i had an ROI of 56% and average profit of $620.
I will gladly take the 97% OR the 56% ROI over the 178%(i know 16 tourneys is not a significant sample, but for the sake of argument let's assume this holds true over a more significant sample size) and so should anyone, assuming their bankroll is sufficient to withstand the higher variance associated with a higher average buyin.
I suspect if you plotted average profit versus average buyin over a very large sample you would come up with a variation of a bell curve with lower average profit at the lower average buyins and gradually increasing to some peak and then dropping back off as the average buyins exceed a certain point. Where that peak is is the key and the average level of maniac employed to get that average buyin at the peak of the curve is where a person would maximize their profit(which, again, would be wildly different for different players styles and abilities).
As pointed out in an above post, the smaller field sizes in the 100r (as opposed to smaller rebuys) makes it much less profitable to maniac as the ratio of the prizepool to your investment is so much smaller. There is certainly a level at which there is no way you can have a long-term positive expectation, i.e. rebuy too much. However, does that mean once you reach a certain level you should quit rebuying or quit gambling??? absolutly not. how much you have spent at any point is irrelevant to future decisions. It is a "sunk cost". The only decision to be made at that point in time is whether the particular call or push is long-term +/-EV. But what it does mean is your overall strategy for the rebuy period should take into account that it is possible to spend too much. I think this is part of what Timex was trying to point out. The question is how much is too much? I don't know the answer and it's different for everyone.
Lots of rambling for not much in the way of conclusions I know. Just more to think about and hoping that someone has tracked stack size in these rebuys as it would be very interesting to see.
fwiw,
phatty
|
|
|
|
im sure there is a right answer, but i cant figure it out, until i do, blind all in!!!
|
|
|
|
helixx
(United States)
443
Posts.
Joined
09-23-2005.
03-07-2007 2:32 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
|
just wanna say i like the ideas being discussed in this thread.
|
|
|
|
Phatcat, i really like the stuff you have to say and you made some really good points. i especailly like the this comment because a lot of people overlook that idea which should be pretty basic>
"There is certainly a level at which there is no way you can have a long-term positive expectation, i.e. rebuy too much. However, does that mean once you reach a certain level you should quit rebuying or quit gambling??? absolutly not. how much you have spent at any point is irrelevant to future decisions. It is a "sunk cost".
This is especially true because if you've bought in a few times then that means you have bled all your money into the table so there is more deep stacks that can double you up. these other stacks are almost like chip farms that you nourish with your own stack but eventually plan to harvest.
HOWEVER, there is one distinction where i think it may be -EV (or atleast less of a +EV than you would recieve by investing the same money in another tourney) to buy back in and this situation involves an excess of these problematic variables
A) Lack of Time- if there is only 5 mins left before the rebuy period is over it may be a bad idea because you will deff have a below average stack and be at a disadvantage and you will most likely not have enough time to double up.
B) Tight Players/ Not willing to gamble- Obviously it will be tougher to accumulate a massive stack unless the players will mix it up during the rebuy period.
C) Lack of Chips at the Table- if all of the big stacks at the table have been moved and there are 6 people at the table with only a single by in then it may also be tough to accumulate chips.
Basically the most important of the three is the Time issue because variables "b" and "c" can be manipulated to your advantage with enough time but when these three come together it may be better to not rebuy because even if you are still profitable it may be money that have a higher ROI if invested in another tournament.
P.S. I dont primarily play rebuys so these ideas are mostly speculation so let me know what you think of them
|
|
|
|
I think if you can lower your average investment by $400 and average 1st hour stack by 3k it's a +EV play. A 1500 chip rebuy costs $100, so $400=6k. I'd say that since you're a very strong player the value goes up, so possibly losing 3k for you is like losing 4-5k for an average player. This is obviously still less than 6k. Obviously this analysis is rather basic, but i think it's legitimate.
|
|
|
|
i dont have the roll for 100r so u can stop reading right now if u wish. however, i believe #1pen is right that theres some sorta math behind it and im not gonna begin to start drawing up some formulas, but i strongly believe the best strategy for long turn profit lies somewhere between the sheets approach wheres hes almost always in for $309-509 and the "blind all in" approach. sure you would pay $1K for guar stack of like 15K @ break, but thats never guaranteed. if your spending more than about 600 on avg i think your are beginning on the down slope of the bell shaped curve of ev here. anything more you would have to get 1st place once every 3 weeks just to be in the positive, slightly (1K everyday = 21K over 3 weeks, 1st is usually around 19-21K) and not many people win once every 3 weeks, but THE__D__RY is probably among those that could. IMO
|
|
|
|
|
idc219
(United States)
721
Posts.
Joined
05-29-2006.
03-07-2007 5:27 PM
-
In reply to
|
|
|
|
gent bot paragraphs please
|
|
|
timex,
plz post more, your posts are awesome
ty
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| E-mail Stars support for all of your tourney results in Excel format. They will show all the rebuys in a seperate column. You can use the file to accurately calculate your ROI. | |
Be sure not to eat before you view this email. I was pretty sick when i saw mine. But seriously take a look at it and figure out what you are really spending, surely there is no doubt you're making a profit from the style you have now.
Cajun sends
|
|
|
|
Interesting subject. Tough to make precise calculations but a few things seem intuitively true;
- Blind allins (0 cEv flips) with a 3k stack are +$Ev (assuming a positive skill edge). I'm not sure when it isn't anymore. I can't imagine a flip between 2 20k stacks to be +$Ev.
- As number of entrants increases, the gap between cEv and $Ev increases (so gamboooling in the 11r is ok).
- The gap also increases with skill level. Obvious of course, but it explains why someone like zang can/should gambool more than others in the early stages.
|
|
|
|
I'm going to go ahead and agree with pretty much everyone else, be willing to invest more as long as the gambles you take are 0EV or better assuming you have a positive skill edge. Randomly gambling and blind all ins can be fun, but these aren't going to add chips to your stack in the long run or put you in the top 3 more often.
|
|
|
hey guys,
i ve done a lot of thinking about this... so i ll be writing an article about it.. Hopefully, i will help everyone towards the right direction(and hurt my bottom line even more) :)
stay tuned
|
|
|
When deciding whether or not to gambol hard in the bigger rebuys, the 1st thing i look at and think you should look at is the players at your table. You know who gambols and who waits for Queens or better. If the table is going to gambol, I dont mind gambolin if everyone else is although i honestly think its just as easy to get a 6k-9k stack playing poker in 1st hour as it is by gambling. As much of a crapshoot as it can be late, I think it may be better to try and keep your investment lower.
BeL0W
|
|
|
|
|
PocketFives.com Rankings
|
|
|
|
|
Carbon Poker Sorting Tables
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|