GT-NO: Gripes And Some Tournament Math

With lots of tourists coming to town to play big tournaments and read Card Player, I thought this would be a good time to point out a few things that have been bothering me that everyone, but especially these tourists, should be aware of. (Plus offer a tournament tip disguised as a math problem.)

1. When a cash game gets short-handed, the maximum rake is often reduced. That is only fair because the rake has a greater impact on those players, and the casino should be happy to go along with that because that reduced rake is usually temporary and may be necessary to keep the game from breaking up.

The problem is that some casinos only reduce the rake if requested, rather than have the reduction be automatic once the number of players reaches a certain figure.

To have such a policy is inexcusable. The Nevada Gaming Commission should put a stop to it. Regular players will always make the request, but if the game contains only tourists or beginners, who don’t know to ask, the casino gets to fleece them.

It reminds me of the days when a craps table had a bet where you got only even money that an eight or six appeared before a seven even though the layout had another place where the same bet got you 7 to 6 odds. I believe those layouts are now gone, because the casinos realized that they were making it obvious that they wanted to take advantage of beginners. The same should be done regarding rake reduction.

2. Another anti-tourist policy that some casinos use is giving big bonuses to those who play a certain minimum number of hours in a specified time period. That would be fine if the money was coming from the profits provided by the regular rake, but it’s not. Rather it comes from the extra two dollar rake most casinos take that Nevada law says must be given back in full to the customers via promotions.

Usually, those promotions come in the form of bonuses for high hands or bad beats which are accessible to all players. But those casinos who give some of that promotion money only to those who play a lot of hours are NOT giving back all of that rake (on average) to anyone who does not qualify hour wise. They are taking some of this money to pay others.

I think that would be okay to reward regulars if they made more of an effort to let tourists and others who realize they won’t qualify, know that the 100% give back doesn’t apply to them. They can then decide whether that extra rake (not the whole two dollars since those casinos are also paying high hands) is worth enduring.

But if I was looking for a cardroom that took that promotional extra rake (some don’t), I would lean towards those who don’t give bonuses for long hours, unless I was planning to play those hours myself.

3. There is a rule that has been in place for many years in most cardrooms for both cash games and tournaments that I think is borderline insane. It comes in a few flavors, but basically says that if you don’t realize that someone has raised and you put in only the size of the call, you can’t take your money back. But you can throw your hand away if you leave that original call in the pot.

The rule was put into place to stop angle shooters, and that’s good, but that upside doesn’t make up for two bad downsides. Especially since angle shooters who are trying to manipulate others can be first warned and then barred.

One reason the rule is bad is that there are excusable reasons why someone, especially tourists who we don’t want to alienate, may not have realized that the pot was raised. A bigger reason is that the rule alters the outcome of a hand. It can even punish a player it was designed to help.

This can happen because most of the times that a player is forced to leave part of the bet in the pot, he will reluctantly put the rest of the money in as well even though he would have normally folded if he could have saved the full bet. But what if the raiser was actually trying to get him to fold, and thus would have succeeded had it not been for the rule, and then goes on to lose the pot to him? The stupid rule cost the guy who was paying attention and helped the guy who wasn’t.

4. The regular cardroom at the Horseshoe casino in Las Vegas has on its wall a picture of each of the members of the Poker Hall of Fame. And even though I disagree about whether many of the names on that wall deserve the recognition, I was nevertheless annoyed that one of the photos was of the wrong person. And thus far my several complaints have fallen on deaf ears.

The person in the photo was casino owner Bill Boyd, who founded Boyd Gaming Corporation with his father and served as CEO, but it should have been long time Golden Nugget cardroom manager and multiple WSOP bracelet winner Bill Boyd. It’s a different person!

(Boyd managed the Golden Nugget poker room from its opening in 1946 until 1988, and was dealt the first ever hand of poker at The Mirage. All four of his bracelets came in no-limit five-card stud, which he won in four consecutive years between 1971 and 1974.)

I don’t know who handles the photos for the Poker Hall of Fame, but I’m hoping that publicizing the error will get it corrected. I am sure that fellow Hall of Famer Jack Binion will appreciate it given he was a longtime friend of Bill’s. (And his steakhouse is located just around the corner from the photo in question!)

5. And finally, here’s a little tournament math.

There is an idea that great players should not risk all of their chips early in a tournament when they are clearly the best player. But this idea can also extend to those who are merely good players when stacks are large in proportion to the blinds, but are excellent short stack players near the final stages of the tournament. Or it might be that they are at a tough table that will soon break up, where the next table will probably be much easier.

To show this mathematically, pretend that you have $100 in your pocket and have the opportunity to bet it once today and/or once tomorrow with an edge. If you lose today, you are broke tomorrow. And if you win today, you still can bet only $100 tomorrow. You can’t let your winnings ride. (If you could, you maximize your EV when you do.)

Suppose you can get even money today on a 60% shot while tomorrow you can get even money when you are 80%. Should you wait until tomorrow to bet? Let’s do the math.

If you wait, your EV is $60. A $100 even money bet that wins eight out of ten has you up $600 or an average of $60 per bet. If you do bet today, you will win $200, 48% of the time (60% x 80%), lose your hundred 40%, and break even the remaining 12%. Your EV is $96 – $40 or $56.

You gain $4 in EV by waiting!

So, am I telling you that you should pass up a bet today if losing it means you can’t make a better bet tomorrow? Actually no. It depends on how much better the second bet is.

If we changed 60% to 70% in our example, waiting would give you an EV of $40 while not waiting makes you $200 42% of the time and loses you $100 40%. That’s an EV of $44 which makes waiting four dollars worse!

How you can apply this stuff to your tournament play will of course depend on your strengths and weaknesses, as well as the other players at your table. ♠

David Sklansky is the author of The Theory of Poker, as well as nearly two dozen other guides on gambling, poker, and other games. The three-time WSOP bracelet winner’s latest book, Small Stakes No-Limit Hold’em: Help Them Give You Their Money, is now available on Amazon. You can contact Sklansky at [email protected].