| Author |
Message |
Flying_Kiwi
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6507
Location: somewhere spacific
|
 Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 7:28 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| kazor wrote: |
| Well your arguing it with chip counts as being pure math probability. True probability is not subjective to outside forces or situations. I dont think a person with a 2-1 chip lead is going to win 2/3 of the time. |
Well, we have to assume equal skill because we don't know in advance who's going to be playing who - and would you really adjust the bracket based on skill anyway? Otherwise you are disagreeing with pure mathematical logic.
| Quote: |
| ..but to me its all irrevelant |
Correct, the external forces (skill, the run of cards etc) are irrelevant which make the 2/3 figure correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Flying_Kiwi
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6507
Location: somewhere spacific
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Skeeter - talking about sports tournaments with random byes - I'm assuming you mean round robin style or league standing style tournaments. Like I said earlier in the thread, it's a bad analogy because a league style tournament is completely different to a shoot-out - and in many cases the byes are awarded a half-point of points equal to a draw.
If you're talking about the knock-out stage of a sports tournament - because these can be structured in advance, they're almost 100% (to my knowledge) done with teams equaling a power of 2 so there's no byes. I have yet to see a KO sports tournament with a bye where a team automatically advances say from the quarter final to the semi-final without playing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cubbies760
Drawing Dead
Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 7403
Location: Suburban Chicago
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kazor wrote: |
| If I enter a tournament and I have to play my first match with a 2-1 deficit that makes no sense. |
I also am not interested in getting into an argument, because I think we can all agree that it a perfect scenario, Everyone plays the same amount of games, while starting with matching starting chip stacks.
The only thing that I wanted to address about the above quote is that you really aren't playing your 1st match with a 2:1 chip deficit because you got a free pass on your 1st match. You're onto your 2nd match, which gets you closer to the money than if you had played (and lost) your 1st match.
If winning a 3rd round game gets one ITM, then you only have to win (2) matches, (with the 2:1 match being a bit tougher)as compared to needing to win (3) w/o a bye. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
etothemc2
Straight Flush
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 383
|
| Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| skeeter1114 wrote: |
Again, if the use of "random byes" was unfair, sporting tournaments wouldn't be using it. |
I've never seen a legitimate sports tournament use "random" byes. Why do you think players should enter a tournament where they have the possibility of starting at an undeserved disadvantage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
markljackson
Straight Flush
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 362
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 1:32 am Post subject: Re: Ridiculous Shootout Programming |
|
|
| NightPrince wrote: |
I think this is a huge error on Full Tilt's part - are their programming team so horrendous that they can't make it so that people are removed at the start, or even better, those who get a bye in the first round are automatically issued with the extra chips.
Come on Full Tilt, get it together. |
Why are you lambasting the programmers? They don't make the decision as to how the tourney plays. Get real.
Last edited by markljackson on Fri May 23, 2008 1:39 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
markljackson
Straight Flush
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 362
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| etothemc2 wrote: |
| I've never seen a legitimate sports tournament use "random" byes. Why do you think players should enter a tournament where they have the possibility of starting at an undeserved disadvantage? |
How is it "undeserved"? they chose to accept that deficit. Since it's a bye, they have to play one less match and that is offset by the chip deficit. What possible reason could you have to believe that is unfair (which is what deserve means)?
I am really not sure why you have to impugn the idea by implying it's illegitimate merely because you have no knowledge of it happening before? Maybe you need to get out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skeeter1114
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 2446
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| markljackson wrote: |
| etothemc2 wrote: |
| I've never seen a legitimate sports tournament use "random" byes. Why do you think players should enter a tournament where they have the possibility of starting at an undeserved disadvantage? |
How is it "undeserved"? they chose to accept that deficit. Since it's a bye, they have to play one less match and that is offset by the chip deficit. What possible reason could you have to believe that is unfair (which is what deserve means)?
I am really not sure why you have to impugn the idea by implying it's illegitimate merely because you have no knowledge of it happening before? Maybe you need to get out. |
First off, I was the one who said the paragraph about random byes.
Second, maybe you need to read everything again and pay attention to what I've been saying before being so rude to a comment you disagree with. The fact of the matter is no one gets to choose whether to play in round 1 or get a bye. If they did, I would have no problem with the setup. I say it is unfair because no one gets to choose whether they want a bye or play the first match. If no one gets to choose, then it is unfair to start at a chip deficit. I'm not saying byes are completely fair either. But, if they were that unfair, then they would never have been used in sports. And, since you did not read this post very well, I am not talking about byes due to past performances. I am referring to a regular tournament where byes are randomly given. I've never seen a basketball team start 15-0, a baseball team start 2-0, or an indvidual start the first set off 3-0 because of playing an extra game.
I don't care if you don't like my reasoning. All I know is that I have plenty of evidence supporting my claim. This is where I am coming from. Some of you are using math to back your claim, and that is fine. It is just a matter of opinion. But keep the rude comments to yourself and try to understand both sides of the argument before blasting people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sand Wedge_100
Full House
Joined: 27 Sep 2007
Posts: 182
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't played any of these tourneys but would like to and plan to.
No one has addressed the NEXT round (that I have seen).
Does the played who wins against the bye player start with 4.5k against another who starts with 6k ???? Where is there any mathmatical fairness here?
Now I can see your mathmatical reasoning (altho I don't agree with the fairness) for the bye player but what about the guy who beats the bye player and advances to the next round??
And what about the blinds. Is it fair if the blinds are 150 when the 2nd round starts?? The bye player has 10xbb which is almost a shove ATC. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mrlova
Four of a Kind
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 260
Location: Michigan
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think private tournaments are not balanced at the start of a freeroll, if you want the SO to be balanced I think you have to make that clear to fulltilt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
renegades8
Forum Fish
Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 3634
Location: spewing @ 25NL
|
| Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sand Wedge_100 wrote: |
I haven't played any of these tourneys but would like to and plan to.
No one has addressed the NEXT round (that I have seen).
Does the played who wins against the bye player start with 4.5k against another who starts with 6k ???? Where is there any mathmatical fairness here?
Now I can see your mathmatical reasoning (altho I don't agree with the fairness) for the bye player but what about the guy who beats the bye player and advances to the next round??
And what about the blinds. Is it fair if the blinds are 150 when the 2nd round starts?? The bye player has 10xbb which is almost a shove ATC. |
It all evens out mathematically, and yes the chipstacks do carry over for each round. I don't see how it's unfair during any round.
Also, Skeeter, what kind of sporting events have a random team getting a bye? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flying_Kiwi
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6507
Location: somewhere spacific
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| skeeter1114 wrote: |
| markljackson wrote: |
| etothemc2 wrote: |
| I've never seen a legitimate sports tournament use "random" byes. Why do you think players should enter a tournament where they have the possibility of starting at an undeserved disadvantage? |
How is it "undeserved"? they chose to accept that deficit. Since it's a bye, they have to play one less match and that is offset by the chip deficit. What possible reason could you have to believe that is unfair (which is what deserve means)?
I am really not sure why you have to impugn the idea by implying it's illegitimate merely because you have no knowledge of it happening before? Maybe you need to get out. |
First off, I was the one who said the paragraph about random byes.
Second, maybe you need to read everything again and pay attention to what I've been saying before being so rude to a comment you disagree with. The fact of the matter is no one gets to choose whether to play in round 1 or get a bye. If they did, I would have no problem with the setup. I say it is unfair because no one gets to choose whether they want a bye or play the first match. If no one gets to choose, then it is unfair to start at a chip deficit. I'm not saying byes are completely fair either. But, if they were that unfair, then they would never have been used in sports. And, since you did not read this post very well, I am not talking about byes due to past performances. I am referring to a regular tournament where byes are randomly given. I've never seen a basketball team start 15-0, a baseball team start 2-0, or an indvidual start the first set off 3-0 because of playing an extra game.
I don't care if you don't like my reasoning. All I know is that I have plenty of evidence supporting my claim. This is where I am coming from. Some of you are using math to back your claim, and that is fine. It is just a matter of opinion. But keep the rude comments to yourself and try to understand both sides of the argument before blasting people. |
But you still haven't provided an example of where byes are used in a knock-out stage of a sports tournament. Byes in a league or round-robin tournament are completely irrelevant to this discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 6393
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok let's see if this is mathematically fair. This is a HU shootout with 7 players, one getting a bye. Assume equal skill.
Round 1:
G1: A (1000) vs B (1000)
G2: C (1000) vs D (1000)
G3: E (1000) vs F (1000)
G (1000) bye
Players A-F have a 1/2 chance of making it to round 2 with a 2000 stack.
Player G has a 1 chance of making it to round 2 with a 1000 stack.
Round 2:
G4: W1 (2000) vs W2 (2000)
G5: W3 (2000) vs G (1000)
Players A-D have a 1/4 chance of making it to round 3 with a 4000 stack.
Players E-F have a 1/2 * 2/3 = 1/3 chance of making it to round 3 with a 3000 stack.
Player G has a 1 * 1/3 = 1/3 chance of making it to round 3 with a 3000 stack.
Round 3:
G6: W4 (4000) vs W5 (3000)
Players A-D have a 1/4 * 4/7 = 1/7 chance of winning the final match, and a 1/4 * 3/7 = 11% chance of coming in 2nd.
Players E-G have a 1/3 * 3/7 = 1/7 chance of winning the final match, and a 1/3 * 4/7 = 19% chance of coming in 2nd.
Oops... I guess the naysayers were right, but not in the way they thought. When there is a prize for 2nd place, it's actually the player WITH the shorter stack who has the advantage, because they have a better chance of coming in 2nd than the players in the non-bye bracket.
It's still perfectly fair for a winner-take-all match though, as all players have an equal chance of coming in 1st.
For comparison, let's look at the same structure for the other proposed bye system.
Round 1:
G1: A (1000) vs B (1000)
G2: C (1000) vs D (1000)
G3: E (1000) vs F (1000)
G bye
Players A-F have a 1/2 chance of making it to round 2 with a 2000 stack.
Player G has a 1 chance of making it to round 2 with a 2000 stack.
Round 2:
G4: W1 (2000) vs W2 (2000)
G5: W3 (2000) vs G (2000)
Players A-D have a 1/4 chance of making it to round 3 with a 4000 stack.
Players E-F have a 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 chance of making it to round 3 with a 4000 stack.
Player G has a 1 * 1/2 = 1/2 chance of making it to round 3 with a 4000 stack.
Round 3:
G6: W4 (4000) vs W5 (4000)
Players A-F have a 1/4 * 1/2 = 1/8 chance of winning the final match, and a 1/4 * 1/2 = 1/8 chance of coming in 2nd.
Player G has a 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 chance of winning the final match, and a 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 chance of coming in 2nd.
I still prefer the first method, because it gives a slight advantage to 3 of the players while the second method gives a huge advantage to one player. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
