Hey guys I was wondering about the EV adj stat in holdem manager. It seems that no matter what I run under EV every year by large amounts and I was wondering if this is normal. For my career of 1.1 million hands I've made 177K but it says I shouldve made 278K. EVery year I'm running under EV except for 1 year in the 5 year sample I have and that was only over by 4k while most years its under by 30K plus.

I believe most of this discrepency in my sample comes from 5/10 and above where I've played 168k hands and lost 59k when I shouldve won 55k . Just looking at 5/10 NL and PLO combined in 160k hands I've won 18K but I shouldve made 92K . Is it normal running 74 buyins under EV in a decent sample like this or is just very bad luck? Overall I've demonstrated a positive winrate but running 100k under EV has had a huge impact on the career as I havent made much money and now my bankroll is in a danger zone. What do you guys suggest from these numbers.

theres a reason PLO is called the devils game

Lol I thought I made that one up

This has come up before wrt HEM and the all in statistic. I have mentioned that hands with smallish SPR that get raised or check-raised all-in are computed as if all the chips went in on a single bet, instead of a sequence of bets. This skews the all-in number and does not reflect the actual odds to the participants in the hand.

I could be wrong, of course.

The easiest way to be sure is to locate a hand with a 3-bet all-in on the turn, find it in the graph, and see exactly what HEM computed as the all-in equity.

Example:

Pot on the turn is 100 both players have 200 stacks. Player A is oop and bets 50 with a made hand. Player B is IP and raises to 100 with a draw that has 45 percent equity. Player A jams, player B calls.

HEM will compute this as Player A placed a 200 bet into a 100 pot with 55 percent equity. Player B placed a 200 bet into 100 pot with 45 percent equity.

However, this is a series of bets, and only the last 150 from player A and last 100 from player B should be considered as “all-in-equity” and THOSE dollars should be computed with the previous bets considered as already added to the pot.

This will more closely reflect the variance of the bets.

Both. It's within the standard deviation, but indicates you've been running pretty badly when all in.
Bear in mind that close to half of players will run above EV and half will run below. Most will be fairly close to EV, as there is a 'normal distribution' of luck, but some players (the very luckiest and unluckiest) will be at the extremes on a bell curve. If you search google for "PLO EV graphs" or "running so bad", I'm sure you can find some people that ran much, much worse over much bigger samples.

If you know your standard deviation bb/100, you can put that (along with your EV winrate) into the variance simulator at http://www.pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/ and see just how far results can differ from expectation over certain sample sizes.

Example variance simulation with an EV winrate of 5bb/100 and standard deviation of 150bb/100, over a sample of 160,000 hands.



The black line through the middle is the 5bb/100 EV line, with expected winnings of 80 buyins. The dark green curves indicate the 95% confidence interval, which predicts that 95% of simulated 5bb/100 players will have a result between +199 buy-ins and -40 buyins. (Which is a huge range of potential results). There will even be some "outliers" like the extreme luckbox (light blue line) that wins 287 BI, and the unluckiest (dark red) that loses 83 BI.

So you can see, someone (probably the unluckiest of all) that has an expectation of winning 80 buy-ins over this sample might end up losing 80, so would actually be 160 BI below EV.