discuss

[meanjean]

Could somebody sum all this up for me?

Am I supposed to quit trying to learn this game?

What is the take home from this? I'm not trying to be a smart ass...but what is the basic premise? Statistics say that you can't know if you're winning or if it is just random luck that your bankroll grows every month?

I honestly try to understand most all posts on this forum but I'm not getting this one.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
"This works out to 96,100."

that's what i figured by the guys at probability told me it's more 250k. or more. someone somewhere is wrong. i want a second opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

mike,

seriously, man, what is your problem? there have been countless posts explaining exactly how simple it is to figure out your confidence levels based on a number of hands, winrate, and standard deviation. if there's not enough info in this thread for you, go read one of the many detailed threads on this topic in the probability forum. in the past, we had to do things like calculate our SD from all our session results. now, you don't even have to worry about that, since PT will do all that for you. and if you don't want to do the simple math yourself, programs like StatKing exist that can tell you with what percentage certainty you are winning at a certain rate. stop asking for "second opinions" and go understand some of this stuff yourself and you'll be much better off.

[Lestat]

Take home this:

You will probably never know to the exact penny what your true win rate is. Even if you could, this will change daily and perhaps even by the hour as game conditions change.

You CAN know within a reasonable amount of time whether or not you are beating a game. It will take a while longer, but you will eventually be able to aproximate to within 10% of a big bet, how much you are beating this game for. Then you make a decision. Is it enough and worth your time? If it is, you keep playing. If it isn't, you either get better or find something else to do with your time.

Keep good records. What seems like forever really isn't. A couple of years back, I went through the worst run of my poker life. It seemed like pure hell. But when I looked at a graph of my total winnings it was just a blip in the picture. It helped me see that what seemed like sheer never ending torture to me at the time, was only a mere blip in the picture. I played on with confidence knowing it would pass. It did.

Be properly bankrolled. No edge will guarantee a win if you don't have enough money to sustain the swings.

You also need time. If you only play 300 hours per year, you have to be able to accept having a bad year.

So edge, bankroll, and time. If you have these 3 things in sufficient quantities you won't ever have to sweat the things mike is talking about in this thread.

[fyodor]

From earlier in this thread:

mike quoting me: "I think mike is overstating the luck factor."

mike: "and how many hands have you played? 2 million? 25 years? otherwise you have no evidence to support it."


The end of Diablo's last paragraph in his first post: " like you are doing here, when not running good, also far overestimate the impact that luck has on the game"

mike's response: "i like your post especially the last paragraph"

--------------------------

Looks like you're coming round mike

[BradL]

[ QUOTE ]
if you don't want to do the simple math yourself, programs like StatKing exist

[/ QUOTE ]

Excel can calculate confidence intervals as well.

-Brad

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you don't want to do the simple math yourself, programs like StatKing exist

[/ QUOTE ]

Excel can calculate confidence intervals as well.

-Brad

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. I use a simple Excel spreadsheet for all my records and analysis. I was just pointing out that between PokerTracker and StatKing (I don't actually have StatKing, but I believe this is true - if not, someone please correct me w/ a poker program that does this) mike can get all the answers he wants with pretty much zero work.

It seems to me like mike is just flailing around right now taking in random bits and pieces of info from different posts - 50k? 1 million? 5%? 1%? +/- 1.5BB? - and then just making all sorts of assumptions based on these little snippets. That would be reasonable if we were talking about stuff that is really hard to quantify. But this isn't. All the data is right there for mike, as are the data analysis tools. If he wants the answers to his questions, it's really, really easy to get them.

[mike l.]

"Looks like you're coming round mike"

dude ive already been 'round. i just argue stuff adamantly that's quacky so i can get that little flame next to my posts. that's all i really care about.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
i just argue stuff adamantly that's quacky so i can get that little flame next to my posts. that's all i really care about.

[/ QUOTE ]

hot.

[mikelow]

...in order find out our win rates and EVs. Now some players will have a higher standard deviation (like mr. l).

It could take a long time to arrive at a win rate, but for most people 20-30,000 hands should be enough to get a good idea. 95% of the time, if you're not winning, you're not good enough.

100k hands might be necessary for mike l.
I've tried the 5-10 6-handed game on Party, and it isn't easy.

[mike l.]

"Now some players will have a higher standard deviation (like mr. l)."

that's not the case. my sd is 15.3/100 hands.
my vpip is 24 and my pfr% is 14 and that's playing 5-10 6 max.