|
|
#1
11-12-2005, 06:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Red Hands: How many hands till they all vanish?
After 150,000 hands, I've got a win rate of 2.90 BB/100. It has steadily increased from the low 2's as I've refined my play.
Still, I have an alarming number of two-card starts that PT shows losing money, some in all positions. True, until my sample size is large enough, some hands by chance alone will still be under water. Those of you with millions of hands recorded, do your red hands approach zero? Theoretically, if you play well enough, all hands should become green as sample size goes to infinity. Short of infinity, anyone know how large a sample needs to be? Since I play mostly shorthand, I'm also wondering if that should make the number smaller or larger. 
|
|
#2
11-12-2005, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Red Hands: How many hands till they all vanish?
[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically, if you play well enough, all hands should become green as sample size goes to infinity. [/ QUOTE ] Only if you don't have to pay blinds.
|
|
#3
11-13-2005, 12:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Red Hands: How many hands till they all vanish?
How, exactly, do you intend to become a net winner with 72o and other such bottom 10% hands? The only hands that should converge green as you extend the winning sample size are those that you voluntarily enter the pot with.
Eventually all hands from non-blind positions should converge positive, but even for a loose 6-max player that's more red than green.
|
|
#4
11-13-2005, 05:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Red Hands: How many hands till they all vanish?
[ QUOTE ]
Only if you don't have to pay blinds. [/ QUOTE ] Obviously I meant excluding blinds. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a way to show, on screen 1, the net on the voluntarily committed money. You can filter out the blinds entirely, but what I'd really like is something like the "Diff w/o Blind" column on the position stats.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
