I am curious just how accurate this line is on the graphs in HEM and possibly other tracking programs too. Just for sngs, not cash or anything. I am wondering if you guys would like to share your stat. Not what your roi is or anything, but just the difference between your roi and $ev line to the nearest tenth if possible and over what sample size. I'm curious to see if this line can really draw conclusions about how good of a player one can be over the long run. I hope this doesn't get locked, as I think this thread could potentially provide insight into how good of a player on is.

i am interested in this too - my red line is way above my actual winnings for my last few hundred 16s (i know no real samplesize here - gotta get my hhs from old pc in too)- when the red line is accurate i run like ish - other results might be interesting too get a basic feeling how accurate these red line calculations are

My results:
$6.50s 3.4k sample adjusted is 0.8% under actual
$16s 11k sample adjusted ROI is 0.2% under actual
$27s 4.2k sample adjusted ROI is 2.9% under actual
$38s 1.6k sample adjusted ROI is 1.8% over actual

Total 20k sample adjusted ROI is 0.7% under actual
Done by buyins to remove any bias from different buyins total is 0.72% under

0.72% off seems reasonably significant over a 20k sample but I dunno maybe not. I do hope it is a bit off because my adjusted line has been pretty break-even recently, but I might be playing a bit worse than usual.

The results of HEM agree with Juks program very well so I think the calculations themselves are working accurately, but there could be some kind of bias introduced that we don't understand, perhaps linked in to the inaccuracies of ICM for example.

are we talking about the adjusted all in luck line thing? yeah ive been really curious to what this means. i didn't reimport my whole database but from like feb-now (2000ish games) my red line is like skyrocketing my profit line , like idk the percentage but it's over double my profit line which i have no clue what to draw from that.

My red line is way below my profit line.

How worried should i be ?

I only have around half of my total HH's in HEM.

Over my last 3.5k sample size, I am running 37% below my expected profit, Blah. I run so bad and play so bad....not a good combination!

Red line is what I should've won with neutral luck. Green line is my actual winnings in buy ins. FFS.

not gonna post my 250 buyin desparity between redline and greenline picture again - but NJD77 70 buyins below sucks but it's not bbv worthy.

To OP: I think i gives a better indication of winrate than green line because it accurately neutralizing one form of luck. But it's still far from close to an accurate true winrate, as it doesn't consider all the other, just as important factors of luck.

Yeah most of the time the biggest forms of bad luck imo are:

1. People waking up with top 10% hands all the time when you shove into them.
2. People waking up with AA when you have KK etc.
3. Other people getting obscenely lucky at your table which in turn robs you of equity.
4. People calling all streets with wrong odds and hitting the river (which doesn't show up in HEM graphs since it only calculates from the point you are all in).

I don't think people should get too hung up on the HEM graph. As Hood says, there are tons of other luck effects that are not calculated as part of this. When I'm running bad I know I'm running bad, I don't need HEM to tell me that. And after the last 3500 games of running bad, I know what it feels like. The last 1500 have been truly terrible.

fwiw i think point 3 is considered in the hem luck graph - at least in terms of all in (i.e. it includes not just when hero is all in, but when 2 other opps are too)

This is some really interesting stuff so far. I'm not really concerned about "am I running bad?" or "do I have tons of bad luck?" I just am really really inspired to do what it takes to reach the 12% roi mark in 16s. And after x amount of games (where is x is a highly substantial number of games) if my redline says 11.8 but my green line says 9 (just for example), I want to know if is sufficient to say that I have reached my goal of 12% even though I have not actually arrived at that number. So far it seems like the red line can gauge accuracy but still has a decent +/- amount. Interesting to hear it's .72 off for Dave after 20k games.

Another thing that simplicity mentioned was how the line doesn't account for the right decision, just for the result. An obv. example would be getting KK in vs AA and losing. But still, I like that the line examines our all in equity after the flop and turn.

Anybody else have results they care to share? Remember, you don't have to post actual personal numbers, just the difference between the two lines.

Cue doomswitch

It sounds like for most people on here, red lies above green (and it does for me as well - my actual ROI is running 12% under expected ROI over 300 games). I wonder if this is just because people running well don't bother looking in on this kind of thread or don't want to admit it? From what I've heard around various forums, it's possible that a breakeven or winning style will have red above green as a matter of course.

Doesn't it just measure AI situations only? IOW, it measures your $EV when CHIPS are AI and how you fare. I don't know if its a fair metric. Given that it doesnt measure the $EV obtained by blind stealing?

Do I know what I'm talking about? now really...but that was my understanding.

angry_man - there is a case that profitable short-stackers will have a red line above green. Sometimes to do with getting all-in preflop with 2 other opps, one of whom folds from the flop onwards. other than that there wont be a "style" that naturally runs below expectation, unless there's some unforseen circumstance or an error in the all-in luck. The juk test has been fairly well tested, and by all accounts the HEM output seems to match that of juks closely.

both your suppositions i assume to be correct - less likely to try the software at all, less likely to post about it.

glitr - it's totally possible you are running 2 pips below expectation. i would also say that the redline does give a better respresentation o your true winrate that your actual results.

and fwiw as i mentioned in hte other thread, i wouldn't consider that KK vs AA is a lot of "bad luck" that the graph doesn't account for, because if the situation was reversed, both opponents would play the same (KK vs AA). like everything, it's dangerous to extract one factor of luck (i got called by the top of his range - AA - how unlucky) than another (how lucky i was to get dealt KK)

pooh - no, for tournaments it correctly uses your $ev for each situation (winning and losing), not your chip equity, using the ICM model.

No I knew it used $Ev (ICM) but I wasn't sure what situations it applied to. If its like you say, its one hell of a function.

I got HEM last week and am still figuring it all out...very impressed thus far.

fwiw, my lines just converged...at sample 150 I imagine there will be quite a bit of back and forth for awhile.

Yes, it isn't supposed to account for all luck aspects, but it should still be a better indication of performance than actual results. For example if you have played 1000 games at -5% actual ROI you might not need worry so much, but over 1000 games if your adjusted line is at -5% it's a better indicator that something is going wrong.

Of course you should always study and examine your play however your results or adjusted results are going, but if you have to pay attention to either then the adjusted line gives a better (but still not variance free) idea of performance, assuming that it is working correctly.

Anyone know when HEM will support Tourney graphs? I don't play a lot of cash and would rather use it for tourneys. Currently, graphs are not available for tourney play.

Also, my red line shows non-showdown winnings...... But I'm a noob with HEM.

great explanation, Dave. Ty for posting your numbers. After hearing how close your line is (even though in some ways .72 may be far off), it's a great way too boost confidence when things aren't working out well. And with confidence comes determination and the will power to never stop grinding...well, maybe until a good job rolls around

pooh - sorry i misread what you said. It's for all-ins only.

slacker - upgrade to the latest beta. You will need to reimport your data. You can get the beta on the HEM forums. It includes full graphing and tracking of tourney results and rocks.

they are available in the new update check out the website for the link.

Thanks Hood. I'll give that a try.

After using my own program quite alot I'm pretty certain that there is some degree of correlation between your $EV_luck and you actual winnings. I often see times when I am super-lucky or super-unlucky and it seems to have a scaling effect on my adjusted winrate.

The times where we get super-lucky and the gradient scales upward then I think we can put that down to letting us (ie: a winning player) get further into the SNG and thus be able to better take advantage of our skill-edge and general "donk equity". The same goes for when we get super-unlucky and the gradient is scaled down because we don't get the chance to take advantage of our skill-edge and miss out on the future "donk equity".

I think there is more to it than this (ie: sometimes, paradoxically, you can get super-super-lucky and it appears to scale the gradient downwards, etc), but I think this is basically it and the problem lies with the limitations of the ICM function itself (ie: the "equal skill" assumption).

Juk

if my green line doesn't catch up soon im gonna start crying myself to sleep.

I certainly wouldn't dispute a correlation, and I'd expect a strong one. Have you got a large enough sample size to pick out whether the very long term trend shows a steady deviation between the two lines? (I'd not be shocked, but it would be complicated to figure out reasons so I'd rather not try unless there's confirmation one exists in the first place!)

Personally, the reason I care is because I've just started playing a form of the game that's new to me. So far, my adjusted ROI is acceptable (to me), but non-adjusted is definitely not. Most forms of the game I could confidently pass the apparent bad luck off as genuine because of my playing history, but with these I can't. Of course, I'm looking carefully for serious problems with my play but not seeing anything really major but I'd rather not have to play thousands of games only to discover it was just a calculation bias and there really *is* something severely wrong!

right i'm setting moaning bar for hem green at 200 buyins post graff or shushnow

fwiw i have 10k games in HEM database. The redline was fixed at what i always guessed was my true winrate, and after the first 2k sngs really didnt differ 2 roi points either side, whilst my actual results line was up and down 8% points +

edit:

to illustrate, in said graph the red line is a pretty constant slightly upwards graph with comparatively little variation. Prior to this data (which is 2009, not hand-picked), my winrate was 0% over ~8000 sngs.