Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Which players are +EV in the DURRRR million challenge? Which players are +EV in the DURRRR million challenge?

01-03-2009 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fees
"tons"

name a couple...
posting in nvg in hs

DB's gotta be at least .115 tons. he might be +ev at plo. what do i know.
01-03-2009 , 12:41 PM
I think hes going to think im stupid for suggesting this but I could imagine sauce123 being +EV in this bet.
01-03-2009 , 01:07 PM
Different play styles will have a significantly different standard deviation for a given win rate, no? (I'm guessing, since I know nothing about win rates, PokerTracker, and the like). If so, someone who's slightly -$EV against durrrrr but plays a high variance style will have a better chance of winning the bet than a nittier player with the same win (loss) rate against him. And the opposite for someone, assuming he exists, who is +$EV against durrrrrr -- lower variance increases the chances of winning the bet for a given win rate.

But as Noah said at some point endgame strategies will kick in -- maybe the model should assume a normal distribution with the given variance for the first X hands and then a much lower variance (and possibly altered win rate) for the last 50K-X hands if after X hands one player is up by Y amount. No idea what X and Y should be.

Last edited by Todd Terry; 01-03-2009 at 01:32 PM.
01-03-2009 , 01:27 PM
There is so many possible angle's in this bet, it's most likely -EV for durrrrr to be offering 3-1 against anyone.
01-03-2009 , 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan444
There is so many possible angle's in this bet, it's most likely -EV for durrrrr to be offering 3-1 against anyone.
Please describe one angle.

Todd,
Just looking through my HU DB really quick, the lowest SD's I have on players over 1k+ samples are 50 PTBB and the highest I have are like 100 PTBB. There's even a marathon match I played against a huge nit that has a SD of 65 PTBB somehow. Obv 1k samples are pathetic, so the actual variation is probably much less. Most of these hands were played against me, and I'm sure I'm more passive than durrr, so I think 80 PTBB is probably a very accurate estimate regardless of opponent.

Last edited by NoahSD; 01-03-2009 at 04:38 PM.
01-03-2009 , 05:17 PM
dogishead

oh and mastrblaster
01-03-2009 , 05:39 PM
This post in NVG suggests that I'm way off:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boosted J
When me and Galfond played 8-12 tables hu, we stopped at 23k hands and called it quits. We would go from down or up $100k to the opposite for the day, 200k swings at 25/50. We did this until the very last minute at 23k hands and we finished around even. He won about $1k iirc. So we got almost halfway to 50k hands and broke even, but if we stopped 2k hands sooner one of us was up like $100k. Sick variance.
01-03-2009 , 06:11 PM
It too hard to estimate numbers etc. due to end game strategy. I think a better way to do it would be to appoint someone to chose a number between 40k-60k? (or is that close?)

obviously their is a huge amount of $ at risk, and $ has a way of blinding morals.

just a thought tho.
01-03-2009 , 11:24 PM
Couple of things to consider:

1. Variance is much higher for PLO than NL. I think the worst case for durrrr is if the bet is HUPLO with Patrik so I would try to model that for argument's sake. And anyway if you're throwing out variance figures at least specify which game they're for.

2. You have to factor in the rake cushion durrrr gets. By his wording you have to come out ahead after 40k hands, not just ahead of durrrr.

If a flop is seen in 75% of PLO hands, that means you have to effectively beat durrrr by ~$15k pre-rake, not by $1 or whatever.

Not sure how off 75% is, but you get the point. (This is incidentally an argument against PLO being the game for a challenger to pick because I assume a much higher % of hands go to flop.)

3. When you model it make sure you factor in the total money durrrr wins when he wins and the total money he loses when he loses, not just the side bet.

4. I don't think the endgame scenarios will skew the results that much. The endgame results can favor either side, so there will be a lot of canceling out.

Also for a radical adaption to be optimal one player would need to be hugely ahead in the first place, or there would have to be relatively few hands left.
01-03-2009 , 11:50 PM
someone stake nycballer
01-03-2009 , 11:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Micturition Man
Couple of things to consider:

1. Variance is much higher for PLO than NL.
Yeah.. can't believe I ignored that. I was talking about NLHE.

Quote:
2. You have to factor in the rake cushion durrrr gets. By his wording you have to come out ahead after 40k hands, not just ahead of durrrr.

If a flop is seen in 75% of PLO hands, that means you have to effectively beat durrrr by ~$15k pre-rake, not by $1 or whatever.
I assume 75% is way too high for PLO, though I guess I really don't have any clue. In NLHE it's something like 20% of hands, so the rake cushion would be basically insignificant... just a few BBs at 200/400.


Quote:
3. When you model it make sure you factor in the total money durrrr wins when he wins and the total money he loses when he loses, not just the side bet.
Yeah.

Quote:
4. I don't think the endgame scenarios will skew the results that much. The endgame results can favor either side, so there will be a lot of canceling out.

Also for a radical adaption to be optimal one player would need to be hugely ahead in the first place, or there would have to be relatively few hands left.
Nah.. you're way off here. Durrrr's put up $1.5M. That's 37.5 buy-ins at 200/400. That's incredibly significant and that fact will dominate play in the endgame.

Obviously if his opponent is ever up enough to make folding into the money profitable, he'll just do that. But in addition to that, he'll just generally play tighter when he's ahead and looser when behind. Durrrr of course will follow the same strategy, but the fact that he's laying odds obv makes this stuff hurt him more than it hurts his opponent.
01-04-2009 , 12:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fees
"tons"

name a couple...
you probably are
01-04-2009 , 12:43 AM
i think alot less people are a good bet than everyone is suggesting.

its obviously super high varaince bet, but i think its by no means a bad bet for durrr and 12 tabling is alot different to 4.

hes prob planning on winning a ton of buyins aswell
01-04-2009 , 03:58 AM
durrr owns
01-04-2009 , 04:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
someone stake nycballer
nah Guy should stake a breakeven 25NL player.

But for real, Durrrr is prob -EV vs all winning high stakes regs for the challenge, not that he gives a ****. I hope someone takes him up on it.
01-04-2009 , 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahSD
Please describe one angle.
quickly winning a few BI's and then proceeding to become a huge nit.

i'm not really all that great with numbers/the math of HU but i'm sure if you was to get a decent start, then nitting it up a bunch, it would make durrrr -EV in the bet.
01-04-2009 , 11:37 AM
That's not an angle, that's an obvious strategy adjustment.
01-04-2009 , 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan444
i'm not really all that great with numbers/the math of HU but i'm sure if you was to get a decent start, then nitting it up a bunch, it would make durrrr -EV in the bet.
POTY
01-04-2009 , 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drasis
But for real, Durrrr is prob -EV vs all winning high stakes regs for the challenge, not that he gives a ****. I hope someone takes him up on it.
It's virtually impossible to differentiate between claims "player XXX is +EV on this bet against Dwan" and "player XXX is +EV against Dwan in general". You would be claiming that the player XXX has an expectation of -1ptBB/100 to 0ptBB/100 against durrrrr, which would be an absurdly precise claim. From durrrr's perspective the situation is similar: if he thinks he has an edge over everyone, then he's also +EV on this bet.

Durrrr is basically saying this with his bet: "So you're saying you're a better HU player than me? If it's the case, you would be foolish to decline my offer which is almost unlimited HU action against me plus at least $6k/hour bonus money." Why would anyone decline this offer if they really thought they have an edge on durrrrr?
01-04-2009 , 01:31 PM
You also have to consider in the bet that theres big money involved, so unless its like phil ivey or a few others they gotta sell off insane amounts of action to not be scared money here. and who would buy that action? unless its some guy with too much money.
01-04-2009 , 01:32 PM
Another thing to consider is that durrrr's opponent will have a lower quitting threshold than durrrr -- if the opponent gets to the point where he's down a lot, he can just walk away and sacrifice the $500K rather than continuing to play and lose more, whereas durrrr would be sacrificing $1.5 million if he walked away (plus if he believes he has an edge, which I'm sure he will, he'll never walk away). Which means that durrrr's maximum win is much smaller than his maximum loss.
01-04-2009 , 02:30 PM
planning to nit it up after say 5 buyins up in 1000 hands would be an awful strategy. i'm pretty sure that the optimal strategy if you think you've got an edge wouldn't change for at least the first 35k hands, probably closer to 45k, and that strategy is to play your game the way you play your game, while ahead, even, or slightly behind. if significantly behind, i could see you being correct to adjust a bit earlier.
01-04-2009 , 02:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd Terry
Another thing to consider is that durrrr's opponent will have a lower quitting threshold than durrrr -- if the opponent gets to the point where he's down a lot, he can just walk away and sacrifice the $500K rather than continuing to play and lose more, whereas durrrr would be sacrificing $1.5 million if he walked away (plus if he believes he has an edge, which I'm sure he will, he'll never walk away). Which means that durrrr's maximum win is much smaller than his maximum loss.
eh, i didn't read all the terms amazingly carefully, but the side bet isn't clarified as the guarantee to play the hands. if i were durrrr i would probably insist that not only does the side bet money get forfeited if you quit early, but some additional money, or maybe just that the other person would have to put up extra and not durrrr, who knows. i'm clearly amateur at making such bets.
01-04-2009 , 05:09 PM
I'm willing to create a bet vs anyone where I am positive that one of the two things will happen:

Either no one takes up the challenge
Or someone takes up the challenge and beats durrrr

What I'm willing to bet against is that someone takes up the challenge and loses to durrrr
01-04-2009 , 05:11 PM
And the reason that I believe durrrr might get no takers is NOT because guys like Ivey, Antonius, Urindanger, etc etc are afraid of durrrr and don't think that they can beat him despite the extra million on offer. It's simply that these guys look at the time it will require to beat durrrr and decide that, hey, I can make a million in far less time vs far inferior opposition so it's just not +EV for me to devote this much time to play this guy who's one of the top pros even if I think I got an edge on him. durrrr might think he's the best in the world or whatever, but even if some top pro devotes 6 months to play durrrr and come away the winner, so what. Nobody thinks durrrr's the best in the world, it's not what the world thinks.

But if Phil Ivey puts up this same challenge he'll get more takers because there's something about conclusively beating Phil Ivey that there isn't in beating durrrr.

      
m