I doubt you're actually beating 100 Zoom. Your problem in any case is sample size.

you could always just perma-ban Mike before he gets the thread locked again... just saying

Actually if you scroll back up you'll see that RP started the argument just like he always does, but dont worry, Im no longer responding to him so that will solve that problem. Actually I wont be posting much at all anymore. Its very clear to me that my contribution isnt wanted and Im sure not getting anything out of it so whats the point?

It just boggles my mind because I have people I play with daily who see with their own eyes how well I do that come to me for advice all the time. But whatever. Im not going to lose any sleep over it.

I'm really in Mike's camp on this one. Most of the time we have no clue (seriously, *no clue*) what the exact EV (or even close to it) is in *a lot* of situations.

As soon as a pot goes multiway and you have a multitude of possibilities that can happen amongst multiple people over multiple streets, seriously, show your math. Unless you're a super computer, you won't be able to do it. But on top of that, you'll find that all your guesstimes (his range, her range, the chances he overcalls with that but raises with that, but then flats the turn, but what happens when she donks and he folds, or raises, or flats, and oh yeah, there's still that other guy behind you, etc.) you very quickly realize you are grabbing numbers out of your ass regarding percentages. The EV tree becomes very branchy very quickly, with each node having less and less confidence in their numbers.

This is why every multiway/multistreet possibilities HH doesn't simply have a math dude to come in and lay it all out for us (i.e. the EV is *clearly* = $3.50, as shown by the math, /thread).

So, we just do the best we can, relying (admittedly) a lot on our past results to hopefully indicate that we're doing something right (when, admittedly, we could definitely be doing something very wrong).

ETA: FWIW, it would be a shame if Mike got banned / left, imo. The forum needs more dissenting voices; it's healthy, imo.

GEVisn'tnearlyassimpletocomputeaseveryonethinksG

"Well he started it!!!"

Seriously? Thats your defense?

The next time a multiway / multistreet situation comes up, I'll remember to page you.

The fact that it's impossivle or not almost isn't issue. *If* almost no one is doing this (again, everyone who is doing the accurate multiway / multistreet EV calcs, don't be shy, chime in with your exact EV calc trees), then I don't think it's fair to dump on someone who isn't.

GcluelessEVcalctreenoobG

I think you're missing the point there in a couple places gg.

The majority of these threads are rather simple and are used for education of newer players or players who are small winners/losers. They aren't threads about wizards doing battle with each other where we throw all pretense of standard play, ranges and calculation out the window. You're right in that we generally don't get all the variables in most threads, but that is more often the fault of the person posting the thread who is not thinking of all the variables. The goal for the people responding to the threads should then be to respond "you pointed out/think of X, did you happen to consider y as well?" The reason every thread isn't bogged down by ev calcs, card removal and suggestions to get on some 5th level thinking war isn't because we can't, it's just often unnecessary.

That's how people learn. Thankfully, some don't want to learn and haven't gotten better in many years and hours of playing poker. That's why the games will always be good.

Fair enough for simple EV calcs (ex. you're facing an all-in and closing the action, etc).

I'm simply arguing that it is highly unlikely anyone is capable of doing anything much more than that at the table (and even off), and yet it is still totally possible to be a winner at this game without doing so. For anyone who disagrees, the proof against this is super easy: simply show up in each strat thread and show your math.

GnotholdingmybreathG

I don't think I explained my point well enough there. My point is that if we're beyond something that is a simple ev calculation in a thread posted by the ~average poster in this forum, giving them a complex range based calculation won't help them. Odds are they won't be able to use that next time they're in a similar spot. If anyone shows up, does their math...they might be right, but who are they helping? Just themselves. So instead of that, we use alternative ways to reach the same conclusion that a player can use as a building block to understanding the game in a more intelligent manner.

You know, one way to avoid multiway pots and simplify your decision tree is to thin out the field when you decide to play.

Ok, I get what you're saying, and that's fair enough.

I'm basically just chiming in on the MikeStarr vs RP thing.

Ggetaroomyoutwo,amirite?G

GlolzG

Lol, you're doing it wrong then. If you can beat 1/2 NL for 6 bb/hour you can beat NCAAB for $3M/yr

I'm on board with this as well. It's not to dismiss the importance of doing legit Math / Equity / range analysis work as part of away from the table work. But as I think Skip put it, we can easily fall prey to beating a range into submission.

The point of the away from the table analysis is to identify mistakes not excuse them. And to calibrate our poker mind for future real time decision making.

But it's true that just a little wishful thinking can undermine the fundamental assumptions re: villain's range. One of the best remedies for this is a poker buddy in your player pool who knows many of your villains. Run some spots and your range assumptions by them.

So to Mike's point it is certainly possible and at times even likely that we might misapply the math to sweep some mistakes under the variance rug.



I'm assuming this was meant in jest given the target.

So that's where you've been. Congrats on the good fortunes! I hope your business grows even bigger in the upcoming years.

Assuming that's 1/2? Nice to rattle off 3 150bb+ wins in a row.

I'm up $7k in the last 3 weeks at 1/2 NL 300 max (about 60 hours of play). Time to start a PGC entitled "I am quitting my 6 figure job to crush 1/2"?

[ ] sustainable
[X] have also had back to back to back $1500 losing sessions at 1/2 before

Mostly $1/2. We occasionally play $0/5 at the home game. Which is weirdly more like a $1/2 game than a $2/5 game most of the time. Either way it's a nice little run.

But it was all my sick ranging of opponents, nothing to do with variance.

I see what you did there.

Can you explain the red vs blue in the giraffe?

September vs October

Damn all the same regs still posting ITT.

How are you guys finding motivation for poker after all this time?

By winning, my friend, lots and lots of money.

Thumb

Any time I get down about poker I remember that the regs at my casino who think they are 'outplaying me' by calling me with atc payed for my very expensive education.
Then I smile and say nice hand.

Trying to make heads or tails of this paragraph.