STATS: Does anyone have a 100% winning confidence?

[SuitedSixes]

Does anyone's spreadsheet have a 100% winning confidence? Mine is currently at 99.78% and just wondered if it ever got to 100%.

[raptor517]

99.88% holla

[applejuicekid]

I'm pretty sure this is not possible.

[playtitleist]

I would, but stanzee plays some of the games I'm in, so I can't. Cuz he's better. Just ask him.

[FakeKramer]

What is a winning confidence statistic?

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
What is a winning confidence statistic?

[/ QUOTE ]

a statistic that measures the confidence in the fact that you are a winning player.

wow.

citanul

[Mr_J]

You can never be have 100% confidence based off just results.

[FakeKramer]

Obv.

I was looking for something along the lines of how it is measured and if it is a reliable statistic or not. I have never dabbled in a winning confidence stat, so I don't know how it works (mathematically speaking).

[ace_in_the_hole]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is a winning confidence statistic?

[/ QUOTE ]

a statistic that measures the confidence in the fact that you are a winning player.

wow.

citanul

[/ QUOTE ]

I am wondering what it is stat wise? As in how is it calculated? Thanks.

[Slim Pickens]

You can just set the spreadsheet cell to zero decimal places. Any of you long-time pros with 5k or so should see 100%. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Winning confidence is a decent measure of how goot you play, but it's really more statistical wankery than anything else.

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone's spreadsheet have a 100% winning confidence? Mine is currently at 99.78% and just wondered if it ever got to 100%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Using Aleo's spreadsheet stats I had a 100% winning confidence after a sick heater at the $109s. Then, a few weeks later my winning confidence was back under 100%... which is a funny commentary on the use of statistics in poker.

My risk of ruin is also zero %... but I'm sure I could bust my whole account if things went badly enough.

I haven't put enough thought into the formula to understand how you could have a winning confidence of 100%, and then have it disappear after you play MORE SNGs... but I'm sure Aleo could explain it in a few seconds if he were still alive.

Irieguy

[Slim Pickens]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't put enough thought into the formula to understand how you could have a winning confidence of 100%, and then have it disappear after you play MORE SNGs... but I'm sure Aleo could explain it in a few seconds if he were still alive.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have a 99.994% WC, Excel might round it down to 99.99% but round 99.995% up to 100.00%. It's not ever exactly 100%.

[lem45216]

This sounds like quite a fun formula to add to my ever growing spreadsheet, as does the risk of ruin one. If i wanted to add it to my excel spreadsheet could someone tell me the formulas please?
Cheers me dears.
-Jaffa-

[Nicholasp27]

mathematically, it can never equal 100%

it can equal 99.999999999999999%, but not 100%

[Ogre]

what is the formula for the equation?

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]


If you have a 99.994% WC, Excel might round it down to 99.99% but round 99.995% up to 100.00%. It's not ever exactly 100%.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahhh... I have to go check how my cells are set. It must have rounded up from 99.95. It's still funny how it can go down even after playing a shipload of tourneys.

Irie

[pineapple888]

[ QUOTE ]
It's still funny how it can go down even after playing a shipload of tourneys.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why? It's going to go down whenever you have a bad streak. It just won't go down nearly as much as if you had the same bad streak with a smaller sample size.

Geez guys, isn't it clear he just wants to know if the spreadsheet reports 100%, not if anyone actually HAS 100%? I'm sure the OP knows 100% isn't possible without the rounding error on the spreadsheet.

[citanul]

basically what it does is it says you have x games and an ROI of y, how likely is it that your true ROI is >0. clearly as you increase x and y, you get higher winning confidence numbers, but because of the way standard deviation works, you can't have a 100%.

citanul

[Freudian]

I have one tab in my spreadsheet that has 100% confidence.

41% ITM and 22.8% ROI over 903 games.

[The Don]

I do and I don't need a statistic to tell me so /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ebaudry]

It is not statistical wankery. It is a very useful figure which granted is not the end-all be-all stat, but meta-stats are truly handy.

[pineapple888]

The basic idea is that you are never completely sure what your "true" ROI is.

Assumptions:

1.) Your "measured" ROI (ROIm) is assumed to be the best estimate of your "true" ROI (ROIt) (reasonable assumption, but see 3. below)

2.) A "normal" bell-shaped curve centered on ROIm defines the probability of any given ROI being ROIt (fairly reasonable assumption, until somebody demonstrates that a non-normal model fits better)

3.) Your abilities don't change over the course of the data sample (Not all that reasonable. It's possible to correct for changes in ability, but I'd be surprised if a spreadsheet did this.)

Anyway, STTs are inherently high variance, as we all know. So it takes thousands of STTs to get a "reasonable" estimate of ROI.

As more data gets collected, the bell-shaped curve around ROIm gets taller and tighter. It gets less and less likely that values far away from ROIm are the actual ROIt.

But, this is an exponential process, meaning each additional 100 STTs creates less and less incremental tightening of the bell curve. Going from 10,000 to 25,000 STTs might not result in much additional tightening, for example.

The tightness of the bell curve also depends on your particular data set. If you have a particularly high-variance playing style ("1st or 4th"), for example, the bell curve won't be as tight as for an average player with the same sample size.

Also, the "tails" of the bell curve never go all the way to zero. No matter how high your ROI and how large your sample size, there is always a non-zero chance that you have actually been running well over that entire sample size.

Anyway, the question at hand can be phrased mathematically as "is ROIt > 0". Given the assumptions above, there are well-defined formulas to answer that question. It should be a fairly simple entry in Excel, but I'll let somebody else dig it out.

Obviously, the higher your ROIm and the more data you have, the greater your confidence that ROIt>0.

OK, I'll stop there. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[The Yugoslavian]

I have 100%* confidence my dick is at least 9 inches long.

Ship it.

Yugoslav
*note that this number isn't rounded up

[SlackerMcFly]

[ QUOTE ]
I have 100%* confidence my dick is at least 9 inches long.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you trolling for queers?

If you want to attract women, just tell them that your tongue is 9" in length and you can breathe through your ears. Oh, and post where there is a slight possibility that there might actually be women reading.

Just a hint. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Scuba Chuck]

[ QUOTE ]
I have 100%* confidence my dick is at least 9 inches long.

Ship it.

Yugoslav
*note that this number isn't rounded up

[/ QUOTE ]

When I was ur age, my dick was 10 inches. Holla

[SuitedSixes]

[ QUOTE ]
This sounds like quite a fun formula to add to my ever growing spreadsheet, as does the risk of ruin one. If i wanted to add it to my excel spreadsheet could someone tell me the formulas please?
Cheers me dears.
-Jaffa-

[/ QUOTE ]

The confidence one is-
=2*(NORMSDIST(C5/(F8/SQRT(C3))))-1

And it looks like C5 is my $/tourn, F8 is my SD/tourn, and C3 is my total # of tourns.

ROR is-
=EXP((-2*E3*E11)/(E4*E4))

Where E3 is my $/tourn, E11 is my BR, and E4 is my SD/tourn.

[SuitedSixes]

Thank you.

[johnnybeef]

The only thing in my entire life that I am 100% confident about is that you are the only one for me. I love you. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[jeffraider]

I'm 100% confident that I'm HIGH.

[Hendricks433]

Wheres the winning confidence % in Poker Tracker? or is it from a different Program?

[adanthar]

I'm 100% confident that I know how to use it. Holla back.

[runner4life7]

i may be retarded, but what is SD/tourney? Standard deviation? and how does one go about finding it.

[Slim Pickens]

Thanks. That pretty much gets it... except that there really isn't a "high variance" style of play... maybe a little, but not much.

[johnnybeef]

mine knows that i am a winning player, but due to my absolute lack of discipline i will be a stakehorse for the rest of my life, and this really makes me sick. i am soooo bad at life that i honestly dont think that i will ever have money even though i am probably one of the best players on this board.

[psparkyuk]

You could reach 100% - but you would need to play an infinite number of games.

Now there's a challenge...

Psparky