At 3:01, he says you cannot re-enter tournaments. The truth is, that many tournaments allow re-entry during the first few hours. Lots of people travel great distances to enter a tournament and have a lot of fixed expenses, like hotels and travel, so it's nice to be able to re-enter if you got sucked out on, during the early game, where players often play more aggressively, especially before the re-entry period ends.

@EmbassyNerdcore

2 жыл бұрын

but game theory dictates that every re-entry needs to be counted as a different tournament for the purposes of tracking your own stats, just with lower overhead expenses. You can't mathematically call it 2 tries at the same tournament, because other factors like # players and stack sizes change between leaving the game and coming back in.

So glad they fixed the audio at 5:42 Spoke too soon! 19:56

He sounds like Seiver.

What are his credentials?

The class is not complete, has many missing slides!

@jaysmith-hill3278

7 жыл бұрын

ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-s50-poker-theory-and-analytics-january-iap-2015/lecture-notes/

@christianbarnay2499

7 жыл бұрын

1. Slides are rarely shown in the video, so you need to open the PDF in another window to follow the course. 2. On the rare occasions the slides appear in the video there are discrepancies with the PDF notes. Compare 13:25 with page 13 of ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-s50-poker-theory-and-analytics-january-iap-2015/lecture-notes/MIT15_S50IAP15_L5_Tournmt.pdf for an example. 3. The video editing removed valuable chunks. Page 14 of the PDF for this lesson was completely edited out from the video, so we don't have any explanation about it. All these inconsistencies make this course series really hard to follow.

Not bad, but in my opinion his zones are wrong as per Harrington. 6-10 M is not stealing zone, according to Harrington it's the zone where you play super aggressive and basically need to go all in. When going all-in need to follow the "First in-Virgorish Rule" as well.

@jaysmith-hill3278

7 жыл бұрын

FWIW in the first lecture, he explains Harrington's zones and says he disagrees with them and why.

OK, technically if the small stack has M=3 and pushes against a table of rational players, they should ALL call, no matter what they have. This renders the greatest possibility that the all-in small-stack player will bust out, no matter what the cards are. Also, it's not rational to continually let the small stack player steal the blinds. However, the chance that you will play at a table where everyone is rational always approaches 0%.

@npip99

7 жыл бұрын

Dan Lokemoen Each player is maximizing their own self profit, rather than trying to just knock out a player to help the remaining group as a whole. If a group of players all call an all-in and check the rest of the streets it could be considered collusion and is illegal play.

@chaosordeal294

4 жыл бұрын

@@npip99 No one will ever read this, but: I agree that generally you won't see everyone stay in (I said that the chance this will happens approaches 0% above), but IT IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST and they should do it, and you can hardly accuse players of colluding when they're all individually doing what's in their personal best interest. Sure, everyone pushing in is best for the guy with the nominally best hand, but it's still the best move for everyone else. You could make a reasonable argument that a guy who is pushing most of his stack with a non-premium hand is making a mistake -- he should let the rest of the table do his work for him, but even in this case, pushing is likely a low-stack player's best move even if he knows he has the worst hand because he's already in a bad spot anyway, and the upside of winning will not ever get better (everyone is all in).

@EmbassyNerdcore

2 жыл бұрын

@@chaosordeal294 the chances of someone in early position limping when they could offer a raise for free to keep others from calling are very small

What is a "tore-nuh-mint"?

@10splay

2 жыл бұрын

Do you prefer ter-ni-mint? I say tour na ment

This guy is teaching to one student. I hate it when teachers do that--so many do.

This is all for beginners players right? i mean no one opens to 3X anymore

@loudorchen9897

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think anyone opened to 3x even back then, this guy is the ultimate 🐟 fish!

@fozzz-vb5oj

Жыл бұрын

I don't know

taaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanka

lol why is he talking about partnership when he barely taught how to play poker

Either this guy is teaching complete amateurs who have no idea what he is talking about or the class is proficient players who think he doesn't know what he's talking about

@StarrWolf64

8 жыл бұрын

+Brett Sylvester his statement to play early stages of tournaments like a cash game is ridiculous. The early phase of a tournament favors those with patience - If I have a 60-40 edge in cash game I will take that all day, but its not the best idea early in a tournament in a similar spot because not busting has value to it and the double up earlier in a tournament is nowhere near as valuable as a double up in a cash game

@lukebruce5234

7 жыл бұрын

+StarrWolf64 How does that make any sense? You should be always going +EV, even if your edge is 1%

@lukebruce5234

7 жыл бұрын

Brett Sylvester Proof?

@StarrWolf64

7 жыл бұрын

Yeah if I'm super deep (both in chips and in terms of the stage of the game) in a tournament and I have 99 and my opponent (who is deeper than I am) shoves then shows AK I'm gonna be a 55% but am probably never calling there. Even though I am a favorite there its probably a bad idea to go with that spot.

@lukebruce5234

7 жыл бұрын

StarrWolf64 If you are super 'deep' why would you even consider calling with 99?