Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** ** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread **

04-20-2017 , 06:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsOnlyChips
u can estimate this urself
13868*$71*5.24% = ~$51.6k

he's mostly playing 60,100 so the $ graph will look very similar to the chips graph

nice results
No you not understand. I know can estimate but want to see SWONGS and actual differences in $ sir!
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-22-2017 , 02:26 AM
can someone explain the latest changes in spins? whats b/e chip per game now? 3 roi?
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 06:47 AM
so much fun on plo spin
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pulaski
can someone explain the latest changes in spins? whats b/e chip per game now? 3 roi?
plo, 26.5, 42
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 09:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pulaski
can someone explain the latest changes in spins? whats b/e chip per game now? 3 roi?
If you're referring to the change in payout structures at 100's, the frequency of top multiplier changed from 1:1M to 6:1M. Assuming you'll never hit that jackpot, it greatly increases the effective rake. Making them pretty much unbeatable in a reg filled environment.

That causes a lot of regs to drop down to 60's, putting a lot of pressure on that ecosystem. Which might make it interesting again to play 100's.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 10:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonaldoVamos
No you not understand. I know can estimate but want to see SWONGS and actual differences in $ sir!
I don't like uploading profit graphs. I ran roughly at EV minus money going to top 3 jackpots, if that helps

Also I got 2nd in WCOOP 3-max event, and ran hot in mtts in general, winning some and final tabling a bunch. I wasted most of that money, as it was my first year as a pokerplayer (started octobre 2015), and apparently there are a lot of fun things to spend money on
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 11:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
plo, 26.5, 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pakichu777
If you're referring to the change in payout structures at 100's, the frequency of top multiplier changed from 1:1M to 6:1M. Assuming you'll never hit that jackpot, it greatly increases the effective rake. Making them pretty much unbeatable in a reg filled environment.

That causes a lot of regs to drop down to 60's, putting a lot of pressure on that ecosystem. Which might make it interesting again to play 100's.
So the breakeven point is still 26.5 chips/game? Wasn't that the breakeven point before?

I keep hearing how the changes have raised the effective rake, but I've yet to see actual numbers/math behind it. What was the effective rake before the changes and what's the number now?
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 01:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by acbarone
So the breakeven point is still 26.5 chips/game? Wasn't that the breakeven point before?

I keep hearing how the changes have raised the effective rake, but I've yet to see actual numbers/math behind it. What was the effective rake before the changes and what's the number now?
If in PLO the rake & pay out structure is the same, it should be the same breakeven cev.

If you define effective rake as the rake assuming that money going to the top 3 jackpots is lost:

Eff rake 60's: 5.94% (same for old 100 structure)
Eff rake 100's: 7.64% (during promo)

You could use different definitions (less conservative, only top 1). Then the numbers are 5.4% and 7.4% respectively.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 02:05 PM
Yeah I was referring to $100s.

Welp, hope they're magically softer. Will go thru the maths later about whether I should play $60s or $100s, perhaps I'll just maintain this 50+ cEV and life won't suck too much.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 03:51 PM
You should play 100's for sure
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 08:08 PM
I still see the same payouts on the .com website, with 1 in 1 million odds up top. Has that changed?
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 08:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pakichu777
I don't like uploading profit graphs. I ran roughly at EV minus money going to top 3 jackpots, if that helps

Also I got 2nd in WCOOP 3-max event, and ran hot in mtts in general, winning some and final tabling a bunch. I wasted most of that money, as it was my first year as a pokerplayer (started octobre 2015), and apparently there are a lot of fun things to spend money on
Can share what biggest BI downswing was please? Ever question self? TY.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
I still see the same payouts on the .com website, with 1 in 1 million odds up top. Has that changed?
Here go max
http://imgur.com/a/9JTbk
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 09:34 PM
Oh, lol, those are back?

Right, the breakeven cEV will be the same since the rake is the same (with a very slight difference due to the top tiers not being winner-take-all). Variance, however, is not in the same ballpark. You will have to be quite lucky to get close to your $EV over any reasonable sample, especially if these are temporary (well, even if they're permanent and you GRIIIND). Here's a quick example.

Playing 100k games with 40 cEV and 28% rakeback will get you a $EV of about $400k for both the regular and millionare versions. In a simulation of 5k such players, we look at the median player (half of the players do better and the other half do worse). The median player wins about $360k in the regular version, but only about $200k in the milly version.

glgl

---

The red line is $EV
[50%] on the right is the median player.

Regular version
Spoiler:




Milly version
Spoiler:



Last edited by Max Cut; 04-23-2017 at 09:46 PM.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-23-2017 , 09:52 PM
^ Follow up.

If you can add 10 chips per game to your cEV because milly games are soft, then you should probably play them. That essentially cancels out the bad variance and adds some sweet good variance if you happen to get lucky. (Median player is still way under $EV, but it washes since the $EV is higher due to the higher cEV.)


Milly as above but with 50 cEV instead of 40 cEV.
Spoiler:



Last edited by Max Cut; 04-23-2017 at 10:02 PM.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-24-2017 , 05:14 PM
Max can do the same forbetter to play 10s or 15s? I think near 30chips easier in each 10 than 15...
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-24-2017 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonaldoVamos
Max can do the same forbetter to play 10s or 15s? I think near 30chips easier in each 10 than 15...
If it were me, I'd study it closer () but likely still do the $15s even at 30 EV chips per game less. The downswings are a bit worse due to the higher buyin and lower cEV, but you're most likely making more money. That 1 in a million shot in the $10s accounts for like 4% of your expected ROI.


100k games
5k simulations
28% rakeback


Cliffs:

$15s @ 40 Cev
Expected ROI 3.18% ($47718)
50% had ROI below 2.81% ($42195) [median player]

$10s @ 70 cEV
Expected ROI 6.59% ($65949)
50% had ROI below 2.23% ($22254) [median player]



Details:

$15s @ 40 Cev
Spoiler:

Expected ROI (with rakeback/bonus/award): 3.18% ($47718)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had ROI below 13.22% ($198314)
97.5% had ROI below 12.40% ($186059)
95% had ROI below 4.25% ($63810)
90% had ROI below 3.79% ($56865)
80% had ROI below 3.41% ($51135)
70% had ROI below 3.17% ($47550)
60% had ROI below 2.98% ($44655)
50% had ROI below 2.81% ($42195)
40% had ROI below 2.66% ($39855)
30% had ROI below 2.49% ($37320)
20% had ROI below 2.30% ($34514)
10% had ROI below 2.06% ($30945)
5% had ROI below 1.85% ($27750)
2.5% had ROI below 1.63% ($24405)
1% had ROI below 1.41% ($21165)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a downswing greater than $2092
97.5% had a downswing greater than $2207
95% had a downswing greater than $2331
90% had a downswing greater than $2500
80% had a downswing greater than $2746
70% had a downswing greater than $2947
60% had a downswing greater than $3135
50% had a downswing greater than $3331
40% had a downswing greater than $3554
30% had a downswing greater than $3827
20% had a downswing greater than $4180
10% had a downswing greater than $4748
5% had a downswing greater than $5189
2.5% had a downswing greater than $5713
1% had a downswing greater than $6617
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a low point lower than $0
97.5% had a low point lower than $-15
95% had a low point lower than $-31
90% had a low point lower than $-90
80% had a low point lower than $-181
70% had a low point lower than $-289
60% had a low point lower than $-410
50% had a low point lower than $-545
40% had a low point lower than $-707
30% had a low point lower than $-923
20% had a low point lower than $-1217
10% had a low point lower than $-1724
5% had a low point lower than $-2255
2.5% had a low point lower than $-2762
1% had a low point lower than $-3568
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a breakeven stretch longer than 4703 games
97.5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 5172 games
95% had a breakeven stretch longer than 5684 games
90% had a breakeven stretch longer than 6471 games
80% had a breakeven stretch longer than 7659 games
70% had a breakeven stretch longer than 8611 games
60% had a breakeven stretch longer than 9540 games
50% had a breakeven stretch longer than 10630 games
40% had a breakeven stretch longer than 11819 games
30% had a breakeven stretch longer than 13319 games
20% had a breakeven stretch longer than 15487 games
10% had a breakeven stretch longer than 18819 games
5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 22969 games
2.5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 27255 games
1% had a breakeven stretch longer than 32299 games
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



$10s @ 70 cEV
Spoiler:

Expected ROI (with rakeback/bonus/award): 6.59% ($65949)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had ROI below 102.52% ($1025182)
97.5% had ROI below 102.05% ($1020507)
95% had ROI below 12.55% ($125540)
90% had ROI below 3.35% ($33529)
80% had ROI below 2.71% ($27089)
70% had ROI below 2.50% ($24959)
60% had ROI below 2.35% ($23486)
50% had ROI below 2.23% ($22254)
40% had ROI below 2.11% ($21052)
30% had ROI below 1.97% ($19687)
20% had ROI below 1.81% ($18099)
10% had ROI below 1.61% ($16147)
5% had ROI below 1.46% ($14626)
2.5% had ROI below 1.31% ($13067)
1% had ROI below 1.15% ($11476)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a downswing greater than $1168
97.5% had a downswing greater than $1250
95% had a downswing greater than $1323
90% had a downswing greater than $1424
80% had a downswing greater than $1558
70% had a downswing greater than $1672
60% had a downswing greater than $1787
50% had a downswing greater than $1900
40% had a downswing greater than $2041
30% had a downswing greater than $2199
20% had a downswing greater than $2401
10% had a downswing greater than $2744
5% had a downswing greater than $3032
2.5% had a downswing greater than $3316
1% had a downswing greater than $3603
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a low point lower than $0
97.5% had a low point lower than $-10
95% had a low point lower than $-23
90% had a low point lower than $-51
80% had a low point lower than $-111
70% had a low point lower than $-174
60% had a low point lower than $-243
50% had a low point lower than $-324
40% had a low point lower than $-421
30% had a low point lower than $-548
20% had a low point lower than $-715
10% had a low point lower than $-1008
5% had a low point lower than $-1309
2.5% had a low point lower than $-1575
1% had a low point lower than $-1939
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
99% had a breakeven stretch longer than 4587 games
97.5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 4997 games
95% had a breakeven stretch longer than 5620 games
90% had a breakeven stretch longer than 6374 games
80% had a breakeven stretch longer than 7481 games
70% had a breakeven stretch longer than 8598 games
60% had a breakeven stretch longer than 9619 games
50% had a breakeven stretch longer than 10684 games
40% had a breakeven stretch longer than 12003 games
30% had a breakeven stretch longer than 13520 games
20% had a breakeven stretch longer than 15740 games
10% had a breakeven stretch longer than 19161 games
5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 22887 games
2.5% had a breakeven stretch longer than 26769 games
1% had a breakeven stretch longer than 31245 games
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-25-2017 , 04:22 AM
good morning .
I would like a tip!
Spin & go games for a few months and I do not know whether to give up or continue.
Place my results:
overall.
this month
after new range
Honestly so alone without anyone to confront . I think to give up! Just want to figure out if I'm a decent player!
Thank you anyway.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-25-2017 , 05:01 AM
You are more than decent! 80,000 chips in 14,000 hands is big big big ChipEV and make u crusher! And good results overall, is just a downswing.
Stay focus and positive!
Thanks very much Max. Seems even with 30+Chip change i should do 15s not 10s!
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 12:59 AM
I have played low stakes spin and goes. Can someone explain to me the CEV etc thats being mentioned in the other thread?


How do you check it on Holdem manager 2 etc? If i post my stats from hem2, would that show if im running bad etc ?
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 02:53 AM
Go to report: choose the reports you want!
Click stats: is the small squared arrow left under the top menu.
You open a window with all the stat you can enter:
In the top right-hand bar, enter EV $ chips.
Then use the down arrow to bring it to the left column and you will see the result.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 09:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulyJames200x
I have played low stakes spin and goes. Can someone explain to me the CEV etc thats being mentioned in the other thread?


How do you check it on Holdem manager 2 etc? If i post my stats from hem2, would that show if im running bad etc ?
Same here but for PT4 ? anybody?
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 12:58 PM
I do not use that old fiat poker tracker 4 is slow to dump etcetc.
However I know this system
Go to the menu and choose view stats, then always in the top menu sx in my report.
In the automatic screen you appear with the name all-in adj.
Virtually 1 column is named 2 chips 3 hand 4 all-in adj.
I hope I can help you.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by puggimar
I do not use that old fiat poker tracker 4 is slow to dump etcetc.
PT4 > HM2 maybe import speed in bulk its slower in comparission to HM2 but overall is a better program, vast majority of the SNG regulars specially the high stakes one use it and that is why the new interface for HM3 currently in beta testing is the PT4 interface, cant be that bad if the competition if copying you #justsaying
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 03:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xPISCIVOROUSx
PT4 > HM2 maybe import speed in bulk its slower in comparission to HM2 but overall is a better program, vast majority of the SNG regulars specially the high stakes one use it and that is why the new interface for HM3 currently in beta testing is the PT4 interface, cant be that bad if the competition if copying you #justsaying
fyi, they aren't competition - they are the same company.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote
04-26-2017 , 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by xPISCIVOROUSx
PT4 > HM2 maybe import speed in bulk its slower in comparission to HM2 but overall is a better program, vast majority of the SNG regulars specially the high stakes one use it and that is why the new interface for HM3 currently in beta testing is the PT4 interface, cant be that bad if the competition if copying you #justsaying
I already knew the companies were united is the 2 new programs will be the same!
However for my pc and for that little I understand about these programs! Filters, speeds, both in the hud and in lightening the load on the pc! Hm2 is higher! So much! On the graphical interface, i use hm2 then i'm comfortable with that!
But honestly seeing pt4 seems like a program done without any style!
On import result between 2 there are also differences in calculations! Hm2 has not mistaken a cent now.
I deduced that 2 programs calculate in a different way!
Visual level I can say hm2 seems to be done by proffesionists, pt4 is minimalist!
But I do not understand what pro?
Is much slower than hm2! So i would not know!
I am very curious to see the hm3 and pt5.
I buy a program I think is the best! I do not buy why the top reg use it!
I make a personal example!
If I play with hm2 I also open 16 tables, with session lord, I listen to music!
Pt4 music pokerstars and the computer is at the limit. If I open internet crash.se I also open image viewer the pc crash!
That's why I say this!
Just my opinion!And my experience!

Last edited by puggimar; 04-26-2017 at 04:57 PM.
** Official Spin and Go's Discussion Thread ** Quote

      
m