Pokernomics.com: A Major Project Collecting Hand Histories

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any particular type of hands you want? (That is ring game, MTT, STT, limit, no limit, etc?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like they want any hands played for real money. There is more information about what they are seeking on the website.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I play a sit and go or MTT, I am playing for real money. The value of the chips is not 1:1 nor even linearly related, though.

The web site specifies that they are interested in hold'em, but they are ambiguous on all the qeustions they are seeking to answer (at least from a cusory view. They use the wording "With the right data set, we are confident we can answer the questions above and many more." the and many more covers a whole lot of territory, and I am too lazy to really surf their site, though not too lazy to post long winded responses here [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

[45suited]

I respect your opinion as much as anyone on this forum, but I have to disagree with you on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
While it is quite likely that they would try and put a book together, I also think that there's a decent chance if they really are doing this academically that the results will be published in journals which are pretty widely accessible (though also not free).

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether or not a book comes out for sale (which likely will occur) is irrelevant IMO. A researcher's livelihood is based upon his research. So directly or indirectly, he is trolling for business. To me, this is advertising. When researchers conducting medical studies look for participants, what do they do? Place want ads in the classifieds. These guys could easily pay 2+2 for legitimate advertising on these pages but have chosen not to and instead advertise via posting. To me, this is classic spamming.

It may be interesting, but it is still spam in my opinion.

[wuwei]

[ QUOTE ]
When I play a sit and go or MTT, I am playing for real money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, which means they are interested in those hands.

[ QUOTE ]
The value of the chips is not 1:1 nor even linearly related, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. This would definitely be a good area to explore once a decent data set is obtained.

[dchandler321]

We are looking to cast a wide net both for research purposes and as a kindness to people who submit hand histories. We don't want to discriminate against people who play in games that are "less interesting" for us. For example, there are probably fewer interesting things to discover in .50/1 but it would be unfair to not acknowledge contributions of people who play lower limit tables.

The question about multi-table tournaments and the issue of how to treat chip value in tournaments is a good one. For example, skillful poker players have a high opportunity cost of their time and if they are behind in a tournament with little chance of winning probably would play higher variance strategies or may even get up from the table because there would be other games to make money in.

Single table tournaments are probably preferable to Multi table tournaments for analysis. Again, though, we'd prefer that people submit all of their hands regardless of the game type.

[maddog2030]

[ QUOTE ]
The question about multi-table tournaments and the issue of how to treat chip value in tournaments is a good one. For example, skillful poker players have a high opportunity cost of their time and if they are behind in a tournament with little chance of winning probably would play higher variance strategies or may even get up from the table because there would be other games to make money in.

Single table tournaments are probably preferable to Multi table tournaments for analysis. Again, though, we'd prefer that people submit all of their hands regardless of the game type.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not about making a high variance move or evaluating your oppurtunity cost. It has to do with the fact tournament and cash game strategy differ GREATLY at times. What's correct to do in a cash game would often be a HORRIBLE move in a single table tournament. That's why this forum exists. Look around and you'd see that its 90% of what the threads are about.

[dchandler321]

Firstly, I'd like to apologize to those of you who see these threads as a spam. I did not intend to offend anyone. I have since been in contact with the 2+2 forum moderator and have agreed not to repost threads that "advertise" for the pokernomics website.

I think it's important to recognize that many people do not view this as spamming and are happy to have the opportunity to share their hand history, contribute to research in the field of poker and get a free analysis, book and t-shirt out of it. Many people have been excited about the project and for them this has certainly not been a spam. If pokernomics were a blinking banner next to "100% bonus up to $100!!!", they might have overlooked it. I also think that a place to discuss the project can be beneficial.

Pokernomics is also undertaking a large expense giving incentives directly to those who participate in the project. Given the non-profit nature of the project and the fact that so many people might want to talk about it or contribute, i did not think that posting to forums would be offensive. Still, I intend to fully comply with the moderator's request and to no longer initiate threads.

I have also contacted the people in charge of advertising for this forum, though I'd have much rather prefered to get the word out in a way that allows people to communicate and discuss the project.

[dchandler321]

The example I gave with when a skilled player would change behavior when losing is just one example of how tournament play differs.

I agree with you, there are plenty of differences in how one should play a tournament vs. cash game and it will be interesting to see how individuals who play both alter their play. ST tournaments also seem better for analysis than multitable tournaments because after not too much time certain strategic situations occur. For example, if there are only 5 players left, to what extent do people go for the lead vs. let other players eliminate each other so they can get 3rd.

Also, it'd be interesting to explore path dependence and win rates of people who in STT get lucky early on say by having a losing hand and doubling up. Do these players than know how to make the most of their chips or do they just lose them back to better players?