|
|
#51
09-22-2005, 08:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A New way to look at it: HANDICAP ICM for Hero...
well we can do the numbers with a 1% player's handicap, 5%, 10%, etc and see if it trends downwards...
but from 4.4 to 4.36 isn't much considering it's 18% vs -9% roi players not to mention, this isn't perfect, as we are manipulating the stacks...but it may be the most accurate to do within icm's scope, as it is handicapping the players based on skill level 
|
|
#52
09-22-2005, 08:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know what you are saying, but whom should one be expected to believe when one provides well thought out mathematical and logical reasoning behind something and someone else dismisses it offhand saying that they "don't care" about their analysis. [/ QUOTE ] curtains. you cant honestly tell me, that these numbers 'prove' that with 45 extra chips, yer roi will go up 5.5% or whatever. thats just ludicrous. i mean.. say you start with.. 900 chips in a 800 chip game, and everyone is at 790 to start. what is yer roi then? do the returns diminish? assuming equal play, they shouldnt. however, i can guarantee, no matter who the player is if he is a winner, his roi will not be increased anywhere near 10%. holla
|
|
#54
09-22-2005, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not telling you anything other than "I think I'm right and I don't care about your analysis" isn't an effective debating tecnique. [/ QUOTE ] this debate is only useful assuming EQUAL skill. and even then.. i duno, i dont have much of an effective argument, but my intuition and feel has done me pretty well so far, and i think that the 'math' used here is off. ill find a more useful reason for my beliefs later. holla
|
|
#55
09-22-2005, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI
[ QUOTE ]
Basically the best player will be the one that has a great intuition/pattern recognition ability and a fantastic mathematical understanding [/ QUOTE ] Please note that I said in my previous post that the combination of math and instinct is the key. I also stated that being good at one and not at the other will usually stop someone from being a complete/great player. So your comments about why hasn't someone programmed a program to crush us all are not really directed towards what I was saying.
|
|
#56
09-22-2005, 08:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A New way to look at it: HANDICAP ICM for Hero...
[ QUOTE ]
well we can do the numbers with a 1% player's handicap, 5%, 10%, etc and see if it trends downwards... [/ QUOTE ] Sure but I don't think it's necessary, we have some symmetry here too [ QUOTE ] but from 4.4 to 4.36 isn't much considering it's 18% vs -9% roi players [/ QUOTE ] Which is accurate on average [ QUOTE ] not to mention, this isn't perfect, as we are manipulating the stacks...but it may be the most accurate to do within icm's scope, as it is handicapping the players based on skill level [/ QUOTE ] Totally agree
|
|
#58
09-22-2005, 09:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] why hasen't one of the elite poker players simply programmed a machine to crush us all? [/ QUOTE ] simply? haha. [/ QUOTE ] prolly not as hard as you would think. holla
|
|
#59
09-22-2005, 09:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: MATH: 45 extra chips to start 800-chip tourney adds >5% to ROI
You probably realize this but I thought it was worth adding that the reason math isn't enough to maximize expectation is because your opponents don't play anywhere near optimally. Instinct/experience is helpful at exploiting these players while a purely mathematical strategy would still beat them, just not for as much.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
