The books will lay 200 to 1, but they will also almost certainly put a cap on how much action they'll let you put down.

Risk of ruin is a real thing. As others have said, if Vanessa has a ton of money and/or a solid plan to hedge/buyout if he wins two bracelets, then it makes sense to make the wager as long as it's +ev. If, however, losing this bet could significantly impact her bankroll (and especially if it would take her out of some of her own action at the poker tables), then she would need to think that the bet was way more than just marginally +ev in order to take the spot.

i don't think her wife would appreciate that

Calculating with twice odds than average player result is 301 to 1

Still more than 200 to 1

Considering 30 smallest events (still think its too much to play) and twice odds than average player on 10k events and one drop is crazy also (I dont think theres a player that suits it)

So now Im pretty sure that this bet is a dream to Vanessa

pure class

sure it's +ev for them and 2000 is a rounding error for william hill.
they won't let bill gates put a billion dollars on this.

vanessas bet is probably +ev in a vacuum, not taking into account the utility of the money, risk of ruin or how if she does hedge (which is almost always such a fish move from an ev standpoint) she's gonna have to take a terrible price.

and if she does have to hedge, there is still a chance she gets stiffed and then either has to stiff on the bet herself like a scumbag or get reemed for 2 mil.

is it me or it seems like someone showing off that has more than 2MM?

Interesting discussion going on here.

Btw did anyone ever manage to win 3 in a single year?
I know multiple guys did win 2,someone does almost every year.

I think we should factor in that it will be his first series,and the schedule is long so his wsop inexperience,stamina and despair (if he plays/runs bad and feels that even winning one can be v hard) could also be a factor when determining the true odds of this bet.

Was nice to see that I wasn't the only one who thought that if he wins 2 it will be much harder for her to sell off action,esp at somewhat fair odds.

Vanessa saying on video that odds is 10k to 1 shows she did not think about it

I hope he wins at least 2, just to see the burn

But he has a good track record, 4 wins on a single EPT which is a lot harder than 3 bracelets (fewer events)

and he is good on mixed games (won scoop 8game and wcoop triple draw)

Yeah I know of his hot run and his skills.Saw a bit of him playing the EPTs.
You didn't answer my question.

If he wins 2 and ft other, I would like to see Vanessa face and guys ICMing him for death

There is a difference in someone "random" winning 2 events almost every year and this someone to be the guy with the 2 million probbet.

The guy winning 2 and being heads up with Vanessa Selbst in the third one.

That would probably make some good TV.

Randos do not win 2 in 1 year lol.
If anyone,the guy w the 2M prop bet will has somewhat increased chances to do it.As long as he plays/runs well enough early.

Was curious and looked it up,the 3 time in a single yr winners in no particular order are:

Phil Hellmuth (1993),Phil Ivey (2002),Ted Forrest (1993),Jeff Lisandro (2009),Walter "Puggy" Pearson (1973 tho) and George Danzer in 2014.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worl...acelet_winners

Puggy Pearson (1973)

Phil Hellmuth (1993)

Ted Forrest (1993)

Phil Ivey (2002)

Jeffrey Lisandro (2009)

George Danzer (2014, but one of his bracelets was in Australia, and I think this prob bet is limited to Vegas)

There were actually more people than I thought.

I think the schedule and the size of the NL donkament fields will make it pretty hard for him, but binking an early NL donkament followed by a small field mixed game tourney sure would make the last few weeks of the series interesting.

Danzer won 2 on WSOP and 1 on WSOP Asia

Bet is for WSOP Las Vegas (i mean, probably)

Schedule is not avaiable, is it?

Its kind of a shoot in the dark because many events can conflict with each other

isn't Vanessa a trust fund baby? 2 millie might not matter that much to her.

She did state during the PCA broadcast that she sorta regrets the bet and that alcohol was involved at the time.

At least one person has won two or more events every year since the boom began. Compiled from that same Wikipedia link:

Phil Hellmuth 1993 (3), 2003 (2)
Layne Flack 2002 (2), 2003 (2)
Chris Ferguson 2000 (2), 2003 (2)
Johnny Chan 2003 (2)
Men Nguyen 1995 (2), 2003 (2)
John Juanda 2003 (2)
Scott Fischman 2004 (2)
Ted Forrest 1993 (3), 2004 (2)
Mark Seif 2005 (2)
Jeff Madsen 2006 (2)
William Chen 2006 (2)
1. Tom Schneider 2007 (2)
John Phan 2008 (2)
Greg Mueller 2009 (2)
Phil Ivey 2002 (3), 2009 (2)
Jeff Lisandro 2009 (3)
Brock Parker 2009 (2)
Frank Kassela 2010 (2)
Brian Rast 2011 (2)
Greg Merson 2012 (2)
2. Tom Schneider 2013 (2)
Dominik Nitsche 2014 (2)
George Danzer 2014 (2)
Brian Hastings 2015 (2)
Max Pescatori 2015 (2)


Johnny Moss 1971 (2)
Walter "Puggy" Pearson 1973 (3)
Jimmy Casella 1974 (2)
Howard Andrew 1976 (2)
Doyle Brunson 1976 (2), 1977 (2)
Bobby Baldwin 1977 (2)
Gary "Bones" Berland 1978 (2), 1979 (2)
Lakewood Louie 1979 (2)
Stu Ungar 1981 (2)
David Sklansky 1982 (2)
Billy Baxter 1982 (2)
Tom McEvoy 1983 (2)
Dewey Tomko 1984 (2)
Jack Keller 1984 (2)
Humberto Brenes 1993 (2)
T.J. Cloutier 1994 (2)
Dan Harrington 1995 (2)
Hilbert Shirey 1995 (2)
Max Stern 1997 (2)
Scotty Nguyen 2001 (2)
Nani Dollison 2001 (2)

My math may be way way off here but I believe that in order for this to be +EV he would need to be better than ~ 19-1 to win each event he enters on average. I just dont see that being the case.

Does anyone want to make a prop bet on whether dmitry receives the $2M if he wins. I will take the no he won't side

ya this seems like a bad bet for Vanessa... why people are saying they'd never take 10,000:1 bets has to do with risk pertaining to uncertainty. If you are taking the side with higher downside the risk is astronomically higher and has to be factored into the price. Looking at the results for people with multiple bracelets as well looks as if her price point was off too as the true odds are probably closer to 100:1 IMO for someone highly skilled in mix games willing to play a lot of events but I could be wrong and that's probably not a big of a deal or as important to why the pricing is off.

Poker players never factor in risk into pricing because they assume large enough simulation to converge on EV. In a 2million dollar bet that will only ever happen once this has to be priced in. Even if you did make bets like this regularly they would probably not converge due to lack of independence of events.

Ok so imagine a casino being offered this bet (in terms of ev), but it can wipe out 50% of their net wealth would they do it? And at what percentage of net wealth would the casino take the bet?

I understand her thinking in terms of ev, but surely risk management has to be considered at some point????

Also if you considered her EV in the bet, do you think her EV would be anywhere big enough to consider taking such a huge hit? By all means chase the +EV Bet but at least consider bankroll management.