Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Poker Theory

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-24-2005, 06:09 AM
ohnonotthat ohnonotthat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Jersey - near A.C.
Posts: 511
Default In the library with the

candlestick holder, but WHO did it ?

*

A friend (GF's friend to be precise) just gave me her records for 2005; they were quite impressive though incomplete. Here's what I do have . . .


3- 6 limit holdem: 145,000 hands, W/R 2.07 big bets/100 hands

5-10 limit holdem: 47,000 hands, W/R 1.68 big bets/100 hands

8-16 limit holdem: 29,000 hands, W/R 2.49 big bets/100 hands

3- 6 limit stud : 78,000 hands, W/R 2.61 big bets/100 hands

*

She showed a profit at all other limts/games (2-4 and 3-6 Omaha/8, 1-2 and 2-4 [blinds] NL holdem, 1-2, 2-4 and 3-6 [blinds] Hi-only PL Omaha, and some 2-4 and 3-6 hi-draw) but the total number of hands at all these combined was less than 50,000, and if she broke these down by game she didn't tell me of it. (Note: The profit from these "other" games was nominal).

I referred to these records as incomplete since no effort was made to calculate S-D., no tallies were kept regarding swings - either up or down - and, there were no records for individual sessions.

Here is my/her question.

Having zero knowledge of the types of games but precise knowledge of the win rate (for what most would agree is a fairly large sample), how accurately can we estimate her S-D and/or confidence level ?

Using the 3-6 holdem as an example (since it has the largest sample size) . . .

What is the consensus estimate of the following -

1. Likelyhood that this person is at least a 1 big bet/100 hand winning player ?

- I am under the assumption that this is a virtual certainty.

2. Likelyhood that she is at least a 1.25 big bet/100 hand winning player ?

- I have this as upwards of 95% but I am very open to the idea that I am dead wrong about this one.

3. 1.5 b-b/100 ?

- Far more likely than not (75% ?) but this is the one about which I'll not be at all suprised to find I was mistaken in my estimate.

4. If we can formulate a reasonable guess as to her S-D that would be great as well.

- If it helps, she is nothing if not solid though by her own admission somewhat risk averse; her win rate is (and likely will continue to be) held down by this unwillingness to push small edges.

. . . Then again, if she can win a few hundred over the next week she'll clear 50k for the year after first learning the game in 2004 - I wish I'd made that in my 2nd year - or 3rd, or 4th. (Or 12th [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]).

*

There is consistency here; the drop when moving from 3-6 to 5-10 is as would be expected, and the surge at 8-16 can be explained away as extremely dilligent game selection. (In this case, "selection" is a slight misnomer since it refers to whether or not to play, not to which game to sit in; there is rarely more than one 8-16; often there are none.)

Thanks to all who take the time to tackle this one; I'd like to help her if I could.

She's my fiance's best friend - MAJOR suckup points are at stake here. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-24-2005, 03:47 PM
Nomad84 Nomad84 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 194
Default Re: In the library with the

[ QUOTE ]
Here is my/her question.

Having zero knowledge of the types of games but precise knowledge of the win rate (for what most would agree is a fairly large sample), how accurately can we estimate her S-D and/or confidence level ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that a typical SD for limit holdem is around 15BB/100 hands. It won't be precise. Hers could be higher or lower, but given your description of her play (not pushing marginal edges, etc.) I would expect her SD to be lower if anything. In other words, I think we can safely assume that 15BB/100 is a worst-case scenario SD.

[ QUOTE ]
Using the 3-6 holdem as an example (since it has the largest sample size) . . .

3- 6 limit holdem: 145,000 hands, W/R 2.07 big bets/100 hands


What is the consensus estimate of the following -

1. Likelyhood that this person is at least a 1 big bet/100 hand winning player ?

- I am under the assumption that this is a virtual certainty.

[/ QUOTE ]

Using the 15BB/100 estimate for SD, I get 99.7%

[ QUOTE ]
2. Likelyhood that she is at least a 1.25 big bet/100 hand winning player ?

- I have this as upwards of 95% but I am very open to the idea that I am dead wrong about this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get 98.1%

[ QUOTE ]
3. 1.5 b-b/100 ?

- Far more likely than not (75% ?) but this is the one about which I'll not be at all suprised to find I was mistaken in my estimate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I get 92.6%

[ QUOTE ]
4. If we can formulate a reasonable guess as to her S-D that would be great as well.

- If it helps, she is nothing if not solid though by her own admission somewhat risk averse; her win rate is (and likely will continue to be) held down by this unwillingness to push small edges.

[/ QUOTE ]

See above. Also, here is a SD poll in the archives that shows that the median SD for the respondants was about 15 or 16 BB/100.

I hope this gives you some idea of what her true winrate might be. It would be good if someone could verify my numbers just to be sure.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-24-2005, 06:30 PM
ohnonotthat ohnonotthat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New Jersey - near A.C.
Posts: 511
Default < Thumbs up >

The 90%+ confidence level for "at least 1.5/100" is not what I was expecting; I was anticipating 70-75 and was leaning toward thinking it might be as high as 80 but 92.6 is a very pleasant suprise.

Thanks a bunch. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

BTW, re. win rates for 3-6 . . .

What figures have been tossed around here in terms of the highest possible ?

I would think while there are a few "freaks" who might attain some monster numbers plaing one table, 3 per 100 would be about as high as a multi-tabler could realistically expect to attain; am I correct ? . . . Or am I confusing MY potential with that of others ?

Both she and I play mostly at STARS so assume no rake rebate(s), which leads then to the question -

How much rake does the typical winning 3-6 player pay per 100 hands ?

- I have always assumed something in the neighborhood of $10/100 for a full (9 or 10 handed) game; does this sound about right ? If so, a 25% rebate would be nice and would add substantially to the bottom line but would not turn too many losing players into winners, nor would it be enough to make a very small winner want to contemplate "quitting his (or her) day job".


Happy holidays,

- Chris

*

Note: I emboldened "winning" since in all but the rarest of instances winners pay less rake then non-winners. Also, her wont to pass on marginally profitable opportunities will lead to her paying even less rake. When I asked how much rake I was thinking of a 1.5-2.0 bb/100 winner whose style would best be described as middle of the road as regards agression.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.