Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Live Low-stakes NL Discussion of up to 3/5 live no-limit, pot-limit and spread-limit Texas Hold'em poker games, situations and strategies.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-20-2016, 12:19 AM   #12801
eldiesel
Pooh-Bah
 
eldiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,584
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

But the biggest problem is the definition of everyone's "thin." Some people mean small value bets that work a big % of the time and some people mean bets that work often enough but barely often enough. Absolute vs relative.
eldiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 12:22 AM   #12802
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,985
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

I don't get your contention.

Do you agree or disagree that thin spots create higher variance?
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 12:40 AM   #12803
Bluegrassplayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bluegrassplayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: China
Posts: 36,164
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

I believe this is how he avoids admitting he is wrong. Constantly changing what he said (fwiw Diesel, everything you typed is still in the thread, I and everyone else can still see what you said) and making huge assumptions out of nowhere for example Andees thinks everyone needs to try to be a top pro, and I only think millionaires should play poker.

Kind of funny, but more juvenile and annoying really.
Bluegrassplayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 01:43 AM   #12804
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,715
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
I was talking about ways to track OTHER peoples live winnings like you could do online with poker tracker. Since you can't track other people's winnings, you really only know your own win rate and what other people claim their win rate is. Poker players lie so their is virtually no way to know how you are doing compared to anyone else.

Unless there is some method to track other people live results that Ive never heard of in which case, nevermind.

My main point was that one persons 100 hr sample might be fairly accurate to their long term results depending on their playing style. Another person may need 1000 hrs to have any idea what their win rate is. So telling someone with 100 hrs that they have no idea what their win rate is yet when you have no idea how they play isnt necessarily correct.

PS...why are so many people here so grouchy?
So if people lie all the time on the internet about their winrates, why the flying **** should I believe them when they make ridiculous claims?

Claiming that a 100 hour sample is representative of anything is completely retarded. Bip! has posted some of the maths behind how the sample size effects the accuracy of an estimation as a function of variance and winrate. Sure, I suppose if you folded every single hand we wouldn't need many hands to see that you were losing 1.5BB/round, but for any realistic player we need more than 100 hours.

Grouchy? You come in here without any prior contribution to the community and are talking out of your ass. What kind of response did you expect?
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 01:52 AM   #12805
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,985
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Ya, now I feel that he's just dancing around the topic and changing the definition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
Fat and thin are subjective.
In other words, fat could mean thin to you and thin could mean fat to me?

LOL, this ain't one of BigSkip's backyard beauty pageants.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 02:36 AM   #12806
eldiesel
Pooh-Bah
 
eldiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,584
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Do you agree or disagree that thin spots create higher variance?
The people on here who love talking about thin value spots, I doubt they always correctly identify those spots, and when they do, I doubt they perfectly maximize EV like they love saying.

But, if you play them correctly they lower variance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegrassplayer View Post
Constantly changing what he said
Feel free to copy and paste where I contradicted myself instead of making stuff up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegrassplayer View Post
Andees thinks everyone needs to try to be a top pro
When I said the opposite he had a sarcastic, condescending comment. Tell us if you're the expert, what did he mean?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluegrassplayer View Post
I only think millionaires should play poker.
When you only offer suggestions never factoring in the risk someone wants to take on, that's what you're saying. It's not my fault if you're too stupid to know what you're saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
In other words, fat could mean thin to you and thin could mean fat to me?
They're very dependent on the player pool. If guys wanted to post a HH of what's thin in their game and what's fat that'd help a lot. I've played in game where TPTK+nfd is a hand to beat V into the pot if he raises you. And there have been games where you're just calculating odds to hit the flush because only bottom set+ raises you.
eldiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 02:40 AM   #12807
eldiesel
Pooh-Bah
 
eldiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,584
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

I know RP and I love arguing, but the point is

I'm saying this because there are a lot of rec players who read this but don't post. It's for them. Rec guys who start playing or start taking poker a little more seriously run in trouble quickly because they try to play every hand like they see Ivey do on tv. Those guys are great for the game. They're more fun to play with than pros and OMCs, and they increase the player pool. Pros will always play, retired nits will always play. Rec players have other responsibilities and it needs to be worth it for them to play on a regular basis. If they understood that you can beat the game getting good at the common spots and totally avoiding the difficult spots (yes it doesn't maximize hourly but your hourly is still way above $0), they'll maintain and even grow a bankroll, take on the amount of risk that they want, that's good for the game. It's good for them, for the people playing regardless, in terms of player pool and enjoyment.
eldiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 02:43 AM   #12808
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,985
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
The thinner you go the less you make for taking more risk/volatility. It's the same concept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
You make a little more and add a lot of volatility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
Someone who doesn't forego really thin value spots takes that extra amount of money and it's his money. Something comes with it, more variance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
The guy who foregoes those thin spots, it's not that the money coming from those river bets doesn't exist to him, he just never sees the money. The money is out there and instead of taking it tied to the extra variance, he's buying less variance with that money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
You can't take the money w/o the variance. You're allowed to sacrifice a tiny bit off your winrate in order to have a much less volatile month/year/etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
The people on here who love talking about thin value spots, I doubt they always correctly identify those spots, and when they do, I doubt they perfectly maximize EV like they love saying.

But, if you play them correctly they lower variance.
What?
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 02:46 AM   #12809
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,985
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
I know RP and I love arguing, but the point is
No man...all my posts are clearly laid out and my points are very specific.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
I'm saying this because there are a lot of rec players who read this but don't post. It's for them. Rec guys who start playing or start taking poker a little more seriously run in trouble quickly because they try to play every hand like they see Ivey do on tv. Those guys are great for the game. They're more fun to play with than pros and OMCs, and they increase the player pool. Pros will always play, retired nits will always play.
Sun will always rise...

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
Rec players have other responsibilities and it needs to be worth it for them to play on a regular basis. If they understood that you can beat the game getting good at the common spots and totally avoiding the difficult spots (yes it doesn't maximize hourly but your hourly is still way above $0), they'll maintain and even grow a bankroll, take on the amount of risk that they want, that's good for the game. It's good for them, for the people playing regardless, in terms of player pool and enjoyment.
So if you're bad, don't go for "thin" spots?

Noticed I said the same thing in 2 sentences?
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 03:10 AM   #12810
t_roy
veteran
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: My PGC
Posts: 2,080
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Just read the the last two pages, and I agreed with all three of you but can't figure out how that's possible...

eldiesel, are you saying that when people ask a question, we should tell them that we can't give them the real answer cause they'd **** it up?
t_roy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 06:22 AM   #12811
`Fearu
centurion
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 114
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Incoming theory, the closer you play to GTO the more variance you are going to have this is all about looking for that 51% and with it comes swings. The other option is to play exploitively this means putting yourself in spots that can be exploited by others and betting based on opponents tendencies, in hopes to receive additional value.


Chances are none of us are really the best at either strategy. But my point was thin value on GTO style can be a 51% vs 49% because you are ahead of your opponents range so you bet the river. Whereas exploitively a river bet for thin value could mean trying to get additional money on the river that other players would not have.

TLDR : thin value has multiple meanings.
`Fearu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 06:31 AM   #12812
eldiesel
Pooh-Bah
 
eldiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,584
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
No man...all my posts are clearly laid out and my points are very specific.
Why do you think arguing and being clear are mutually exclusive?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Sun will always rise...
I wouldn't be proclaiming yourself the king of clarity with responses like this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
So if you're bad, don't go for "thin" spots?
This is exactly it. If the choices were

1) avoid the spot
2) try to do well but lose

why don't you guys get that #1 is better?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Noticed I said the same thing in 2 sentences?
I missed it, you should be clearer next time.
eldiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 06:39 AM   #12813
eldiesel
Pooh-Bah
 
eldiesel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,584
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by t_roy View Post
eldiesel, are you saying that when people ask a question, we should tell them that we can't give them the real answer cause they'd **** it up?
It's not like the "geniuses" on here have the "real answer." I know they all think they do. But even if they did, the answers are so geared towards guys who have played every week for years. Guys who are just starting to play regularly read about some advanced concepts and get overwhelmed and play too many hands and 3- and 4-bet too much and lose quickly and are discouraged from playing more.

The last few hands I commented on in this sub forum were basically "getting better at common spots will help so much more than asking strangers about a very uncommon spot against an unknown V." That's the best advice the OPs can get and no one offers that and it's terrible for the game.

But I didn't start this discussion. Someone weeks ago said you can't win by foregoing thin value spots, you'd go broke and it's just a matter of time. (It was said via a metaphor so BGP will have a reason why the guy didn't actually mean that, just like Andees comment) I was trying to explain why that's insanity. If your ceiling hourly is $X, it is completely doable to avoid some situations and only win $(90%)*(X) instead. Not only is it doable, in practice it'd turn plenty of players from losing or breakeven players to small winners. It's better for those players and for almost everyone in their player pools.
eldiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 09:35 AM   #12814
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,314
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Angrist View Post
So if people lie all the time on the internet about their winrates, why the flying **** should I believe them when they make ridiculous claims?

Claiming that a 100 hour sample is representative of anything is completely retarded. Bip! has posted some of the maths behind how the sample size effects the accuracy of an estimation as a function of variance and winrate. Sure, I suppose if you folded every single hand we wouldn't need many hands to see that you were losing 1.5BB/round, but for any realistic player we need more than 100 hours.

Grouchy? You come in here without any prior contribution to the community and are talking out of your ass. What kind of response did you expect?
You're acting like Im saying the world is flat. All Im saying is that the tighter you play the less hands you need to get your true win rate. The looser you play, the more variance you will have and the more hands you will need. You just proved my point for me by saying if you folded every single hand (the very definition of playing as tight as possible), you dont even need to play any hands before we know your win rate).

From what Ive read here it seems that the common wisdom is that 10BBs per hour is crushing the game. Thats probably true because there arent that many winners in the first place and most bigger winners move up, but 10BBs is certainly not the ceiling, especially if you are good at table selection and play at a big enough room where table selection is an option. A lot of very good players also have very big egos and will butt heads with other good players all session, when a different player who may not be quite as good but has less of an ego moves to a different table and runs it over for much more profit with much lower variance.

You also need a lot less hands to get your true win rate if you play during the afternoon with 6 guys over 75 who never make any moves and play with their hands face up.

Last edited by MikeStarr; 01-20-2016 at 09:55 AM.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:01 AM   #12815
Garick
Oberbiergenießer
 
Garick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Do you even math, bruh?
Posts: 19,556
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
All Im saying is that the tighter you play the less hands you need to get your true win rate. The looser you play, the more variance you will have and the more hands you will need.
Actually, no. Aggression factor is the determinate here, not tight v. loose. Interestingly enough, winning LAGs actually have much less variance than TAGs with the same winrate. This is because LAGs profits are coming from a lot of small/medium pots with a lto of bet/folding, and TAGs are more often involved in fewer pots, but their profit often comes from very large pots early in the hand that have high variance after the money went in.

Quote:
You also need a lot less hands to get your true win rate if you play during the afternoon with 6 guys over 75 who never make any moves and play with their hands face up.
This is true, but is due to the fact that you have better info on your Vs range, not because the Vs fold a lot.

Check out bip!'s math on 95% confidence winrates earlier ITT. Even for a low standard deviation player, the +/- on a real winrate is huge when the sample is only 100 hours.
Garick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:09 AM   #12816
suited fours
Pooh-Bah
 
suited fours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 4,147
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick View Post
Check out bip!'s math on 95% confidence winrates earlier ITT. Even for a low standard deviation player, the +/- on a real winrate is huge when the sample is only 100 hours.
After 100 hours, it would hard to get 95% interval much less than +-12bb/hr. (99% interval +-18bb/hr)
suited fours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:17 AM   #12817
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,314
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick View Post
Actually, no. Aggression factor is the determinate here, not tight v. loose. Interestingly enough, winning LAGs actually have much less variance than TAGs with the same winrate. This is because LAGs profits are coming from a lot of small/medium pots with a lto of bet/folding, and TAGs are more often involved in fewer pots, but their profit often comes from very large pots early in the hand that have high variance after the money went in.


This is true, but is due to the fact that you have better info on your Vs range, not because the Vs fold a lot.

Check out bip!'s math on 95% confidence winrates earlier ITT. Even for a low standard deviation player, the +/- on a real winrate is huge when the sample is only 100 hours.
Hmm. Thats interesting. Im not sure I agree but I have to put some thought to it. I think maybe my defintion of a LAG is different than yours. I dont think of myself as a LAG, but maybe Ive shifted more and more towards the LAG play you are talking about over the years.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:27 AM   #12818
suited fours
Pooh-Bah
 
suited fours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 4,147
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by eldiesel View Post
It's not like the "geniuses" on here have the "real answer." I know they all think they do. But even if they did, the answers are so geared towards guys who have played every week for years. Guys who are just starting to play regularly read about some advanced concepts and get overwhelmed and play too many hands and 3- and 4-bet too much and lose quickly and are discouraged from playing more.

The last few hands I commented on in this sub forum were basically "getting better at common spots will help so much more than asking strangers about a very uncommon spot against an unknown V." That's the best advice the OPs can get and no one offers that and it's terrible for the game.

But I didn't start this discussion. Someone weeks ago said you can't win by foregoing thin value spots, you'd go broke and it's just a matter of time. (It was said via a metaphor so BGP will have a reason why the guy didn't actually mean that, just like Andees comment) I was trying to explain why that's insanity. If your ceiling hourly is $X, it is completely doable to avoid some situations and only win $(90%)*(X) instead. Not only is it doable, in practice it'd turn plenty of players from losing or breakeven players to small winners. It's better for those players and for almost everyone in their player pools.
The few weeks ago discussion I recall was someone advocating folding QQ if someone shoved AK and showed.

You can be a winning player with a basic play-it-safe gameplan, but I'm not sure what you are suggesting the role of the forums should be to serve the person executing that style. Should we have a rating system for tough spot, common spot? What, in practical terms, are you trying to say?
suited fours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:30 AM   #12819
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,012
*** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

People want to minimize down swings, not variance. Downswings are a factor of winrate AND variance.

A top notch player may have higher variance and smaller downswings than an average winning player - solely because the top notch player's WR is superior (and the change in variance isn't as significant).

I don't agree a TAG would have lower variance than a LAG.. but I really hate LAG and TAG as terms. Mainly because a crusher is tight and aggressive compared to fish. The shades of "tight" are what get broken into lag and tag.. but that is all subjective and usually just flexing in the mirror.

(and fwiw.. some want to maximize WR regardless of variance)
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:37 AM   #12820
DeathCabForTootie
Pooh-Bah
 
DeathCabForTootie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: SHR Tunaments
Posts: 5,736
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by bip! View Post
People want to minimize down swings, not variance. Downswings are a factor of winrate AND variance.
Can we add this as a sticky and close this abortion down?
DeathCabForTootie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:40 AM   #12821
suited fours
Pooh-Bah
 
suited fours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 4,147
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathCabForTootie View Post
Can we add this as a sticky and close this abortion down?
lol at people reading the stickies
suited fours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:42 AM   #12822
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,314
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by bip! View Post
People want to minimize down swings, not variance. Downswings are a factor of winrate AND variance.

A top notch player may have higher variance and smaller downswings than an average winning player - solely because the top notch player's WR is superior (and the change in variance isn't as significant).

I don't agree a TAG would have lower variance than a LAG.. but I really hate LAG and TAG as terms. Mainly because a crusher is tight and aggressive compared to fish. The shades of "tight" are what get broken into lag and tag.. but that is all subjective and usually just flexing in the mirror.

(and fwiw.. some want to maximize WR regardless of variance)
Thank you for reading my mind and saying what I couldnt seem to articulate clearly.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:46 AM   #12823
BigSkip
The Situation
 
BigSkip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Possibly in a pen without MILFs
Posts: 17,847
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

How did y'all find out about my beauty pageants?
BigSkip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:51 AM   #12824
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,012
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathCabForTootie View Post
Can we add this as a sticky and close this abortion down?

If one read the entire thread, this would be "rediscovered" several hundred times throughout.

The very root of the arguments in this thread is a very common misunderstanding of what variance means. People use it as a substitute for "downswing" and from there the conversation is ****ed.

Another overlooked aspect.. if one is not a winning player, no amount of variance reduction will reduce downswings.
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2016, 11:52 AM   #12825
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 29,429
Re: *** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
PS...why are so many people here so grouchy?
Welcome to poker!

Gstandard,imoG
gobbledygeek is offline   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 04:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online