Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em live cash games of all stakes.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-01-2017, 05:14 AM   #17401
feel wrath
The Situation
 
feel wrath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: lost on the turn
Posts: 24,030
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by wj94 View Post
^^this



Also what kind of idiot gave you 3-1 odds on that?


All this Mike Starr hating be gone

If they're good results, let's be positive - they're good results and he won the bet

Leave the dude alone
feel wrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 10:10 AM   #17402
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
So you played half your usual stakes for a month to win at most 3 buyins of the stake you usually play at?
If i played the minimum 100 hours and hit $30/hr I would win $3000 plus $1500 for a total of $4500. That's a total of $45/hr. That's a damned good win rate for 2/5 so I didnt feel like I would be missing out on potential profit by playing lower stakes for a month.

To prevent me from stopping at 100 hours and locking in a win (if I was winning at that point), I was not allowed to play higher stakes at all. I was confidant that I could stay ahead of the $30/hr mark so I kept grinding way past 100 hrs.

How exactly did I win "at most 3 buyins of the stake" I usually play at? That was just the bet. I won the $7670 on top of that. You think Im disappointed with a $9170 month?
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 10:15 AM   #17403
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by wj94 View Post
^^this

Also what kind of idiot gave you 3-1 odds on that?
How many people do you think can break $30/hr at 1/2? Its not exactly easy to do. I actually think I should've gotten better odds. Several of my 2/5 friends told me I was crazy.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:07 PM   #17404
aoFrantic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aoFrantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,539
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

You're being results orientated Mike. Congratulations on the win and good month but just on simple math you took a bad bet. The bet was not only bad at face value, but gave you terrible marginal utility because you're a dude who puts in a ton of hours but ~70 of your hours last month were basically useless.

If you played say 150 hours at 1/2, made 35/hr you would have made less than playing 150 hours at 2/5 with a 10bb/hr win rate.

Last edited by aoFrantic; 01-01-2017 at 12:22 PM.
aoFrantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:15 PM   #17405
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
You're being results orientated Mike. Congratulations on the win and good month but just on simple math you took a bad bet. The bet was not only bad at fave value, but gave you terrible marginal utility because you're a dude who puts in a ton of hours but ~70 of your hours last month were basically useless.
How so?

Lets assume my long term win rate at 1/2 is $30/hr and at 2/5 its $45/hr. I guess you could say I gave away $15/hr times 70 hrs in equity. Certainly not a useless 70 hrs. I still made a real $3150 in those 70 hours and an assumed $2100 based on the assumed $30/hr win rate.

Also, when the bet was made I didnt know how it would turn out. I really didnt think I would be so far above the $30/hr mark when I agreed to the "no higher stakes" clause. It wouldnt have made much sense to just not play any more the rest of the month (those 70 hrs) just so I didnt get up any assumed equity by playing lower stakes than normal.

Added bonus....I worked on some things that I believe will make my 2/5 and 5/10 game better in the future. Specifically more LAG play and more deep stack play.

Last edited by MikeStarr; 01-01-2017 at 12:23 PM.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:19 PM   #17406
turtle82
adept
 
turtle82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 897
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Seems super results oriented imo.

It's all good that you won, but talking winrates over 100 hours is a bit silly. What if you ran at 22/hr over 130 hours and lost 500 from the bet for a total net of 2360. Is 18/hr still a damned good winrate for 2/5?

Congrats on winning anyway, but I agree it was a bad bet
turtle82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:23 PM   #17407
aoFrantic
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
aoFrantic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,539
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
How so?
Look up the term "declining marginal utility."

Let's be real with everyone Mike. You went on a downswing at 2/5 so you took this bet because you got a bit sheepish at 2/5, wanted to put hours in while going down in stakes and took this as some encouragement to work on your game and get volume.
aoFrantic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:41 PM   #17408
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic View Post
Look up the term "declining marginal utility."

Let's be real with everyone Mike. You went on a downswing at 2/5 so you took this bet because you got a bit sheepish at 2/5, wanted to put hours in while going down in stakes and took this as some encouragement to work on your game and get volume.

The subject of how beatable 1/2 was came up over and over again. I basically laughed at the guys saying it was so tough to beat for any reasonable number due to rake being the same as 2/5 and tips being a higher percentage of total profit. My position was that the players are so much worse that none of that matters. Several times I said "one of these days Im gonna grind 1/2 just to see what happens". I played some 1/2 with a friend several months ago in my normal room and was shocked at how bad a lot of the players were so I was pretty confidant that I would crush it.

Then, I happened to hit a big downswing at 2/5 (big for me...8 buy ins). So, I decided that this was the perfect time to test my theory about 1/2.

So the answer is that youre right. I did this prop bet at this particular time because of my downswing, but I was going to do it sooner or later anyway. The timing was just perfect right now.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:45 PM   #17409
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle82 View Post
Seems super results oriented imo.

It's all good that you won, but talking winrates over 100 hours is a bit silly. What if you ran at 22/hr over 130 hours and lost 500 from the bet for a total net of 2360. Is 18/hr still a damned good winrate for 2/5?

Congrats on winning anyway, but I agree it was a bad bet
Then I would've been disappointed but still made $2360. Not exactly the end of the world.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 12:52 PM   #17410
turtle82
adept
 
turtle82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 897
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
Then I would've been disappointed but still made $2360. Not exactly the end of the world.
Never said that it was, and also not hating at all. Only offered my opinion that it was a bad bet for you if all things assumed were true, and that going by results instead of expectation is a bit silly

Just based on math... lets assume our winrate at 1/2 is 30/hr overall and at 2/5 its 45/hr as you said.

We take the same bet for 2 months and play 160 hours each.

First month we win at 35/hr for a total net of 7100 (5600+1500). Second month we win at 25/hr for a total net of 3500 (4000-500). thats 10600 expected

Now take 320 hours at 45/hr at 2/5 and thats 14,400 expected

Something around 8:1 would have been the odds to make it worth it imo
turtle82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 01:20 PM   #17411
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by turtle82 View Post
Never said that it was, and also not hating at all. Only offered my opinion that it was a bad bet for you if all things assumed were true, and that going by results instead of expectation is a bit silly

Just based on math... lets assume our winrate at 1/2 is 30/hr overall and at 2/5 its 45/hr as you said.

We take the same bet for 2 months and play 160 hours each.

First month we win at 35/hr for a total net of 7100 (5600+1500). Second month we win at 25/hr for a total net of 3500 (4000-500). thats 10600 expected

Now take 320 hours at 45/hr at 2/5 and thats 14,400 expected

Something around 8:1 would have been the odds to make it worth it imo
OK, that math makes sense if I was comparing the two options long term but I wasnt. I also wasnt doing this solely for the money. I was doing it to prove a point and because like I said in my last post, I was on a down swing and the timing was perfect.

Im confidant that my long term win rate at 1/2 would be in the neighborhood of $30/hr. Possibly a bit more so I was confidant that I would win the bet if I ran average which would put me close to my 2/5 win rate so I didnt feel like I was giving up any potential profit from playing lower.

As far as the bet goes, my plan was to grind a ton of hours at the beginning and see where I was which gave me a big advantage. I could adjust from there as far as volume. A normal month for me is about 125 hours. If after a while if it was obvious I wasn't going to break $30/hr I could forfeit the bet and go back and play 2/5 (if I was playing well and couldn't hit $30/hr because I overestimated what is possible).

What happened was I was crushing and I knew I would win the bet. I couldve quit at my normal 125 hours or so and ended up with a really good month that would've been somewhere above an average 2/5 month for me profit wise including the $1500 from the bet. However, I just kept playing 1/2 for a couple reasons. The max buy in is $300 (150BBs) and I wanted to practice playing deep stacked, I was LAGging it up and having fun and I had a renewed focus since I had no reads on anyone.

Hopefully, the experience has improved my 2/5 game and if so the bet was all that more beneficial.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 03:35 PM   #17412
OvertlySexual
old hand
 
OvertlySexual's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,527
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I think there's a ton of faulty thinking here.

I have 300 hr samples in 2/5 where I am winning at 19bb/hr and 500 hr samples where I am winning at 16bb/hr. Does this prove I can beat the game for 16bb? No, it doesn't. It's just variance running wild in a small sample size.

In this forum we are talking about how much 500 hours is too small of a sample size to determine true winrate, but apparently those who placed the bet were comfortable with a 100 hour sample size. In reality they were betting that statistical noise would favor them.

I am pretty sure a more statistically minded poster could plug in a hypothetical win rates from 10bb/hr to 15bb/hr combined with your observed standard deviation in order to calculate the percentage of time you do in fact win more than 15bb/hr in a 100 hour sample.

The funniest part is that if you are a winner and you experience a downswing, regression to the mean is bound to give you countervailing run good, so in all likelihood you wasted your run good at a lower game.

Last edited by OvertlySexual; 01-01-2017 at 03:45 PM.
OvertlySexual is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 03:40 PM   #17413
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by OvertlySexual View Post
I think there's a ton of faulty thinking here.

I have 500 hr samples in 2/5 where I am winning at 14bb/hr and 100 hr samples where I am winning at 20bb/hr. Does this prove I can beat the game for 14bb? No, it doesn't. It's just variance running wild in a small sample size.

In this forum we are talking about how much 500 hours is too small of a sample size to determine true winrate, but apparently those who placed the bet were comfortable with a 100 hour sample size. In reality they were betting that statistical noise would favor them.

I am pretty sure a more statistically minded poster could plug in a hypothetical win rates from 10bb/hr to 15bb/hr combined with your observed standard deviation in order to calculate the percentage of time you do in fact win more than 15bb/hr in a 100 hour sample.

The funniest part is that if you are a winner and you experience a downswing, regression to the mean is bound to give you countervailing run good, so in all likelihood you wasted your run good at a lower game.
Ive played more than enough to know the difference between run good / run bad / massive edge / getting outplayed. Based on my experience, I believe my long term win rate at 1/2 would be about $30/hr even though I hit $45/hr during this 170 hr sample.

I was surely due to run better after the 2/5 downswing, but I believe I ran about avg at 1/2. I just happened to get paid off big on a few hands that juiced my win rate. If you want to call that running good, then fine. I think of it as playing well against donks.
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 03:47 PM   #17414
Garick
Oberbiergenießer
 
Garick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Do you even math, bruh?
Posts: 24,659
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
if you are a winner and you experience a downswing, regression to the mean is bound to give you countervailing run good.
Not sure if serious, but regression to the man just means that the next sample is more likely to be close to average if the last one was extreme, not that there will be a countervailing extreme to bring the full sample towards expected results.

What you are describing is not regression to the mean, but rather the Gambler's Fallacy.
Garick is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 03:58 PM   #17415
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 24,055
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Can we have a Mike Starr containment thread?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bwslim69 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 04:16 PM   #17416
OvertlySexual
old hand
 
OvertlySexual's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,527
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick View Post
Not sure if serious, but regression to the man just means that the next sample is more likely to be close to average if the last one was extreme, not that there will be a countervailing extreme to bring the full sample towards expected results.

What you are describing is not regression to the mean, but rather the Gambler's Fallacy.
Thanks for this, that distinction always threw me off and as a matter of fact, I wanted to start a thread on the probability forum so as to get an answer.

Quote:
Ive played more than enough to know the difference between run good / run bad / massive edge / getting outplayed. Based on my experience, I believe my long term win rate at 1/2 would be about $30/hr even though I hit $45/hr during this 170 hr sample.

I was surely due to run better after the 2/5 downswing, but I believe I ran about avg at 1/2. I just happened to get paid off big on a few hands that juiced my win rate. If you want to call that running good, then fine. I think of it as playing well against donks.
I am sure you are a winning player at 1/2. You might be even a 15bb/hr winner at it. 100 or 150 hours doesn't prove it however. It's silly to pretend it does.

And while all of us have an idea of where we stand, I don't think that anyone can pinpoint their expected winrate with such accuracy.

Last, but not least, as has been pointed out in these forums, performance in all in situations is one component of run good. Flopping good hands is another. Flopping good hands when your opponent has the second or third best hand is another. And so on and so on.
OvertlySexual is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 05:23 PM   #17417
johnny_on_the_spot
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnny_on_the_spot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: S-Mart
Posts: 10,941
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by feel wrath View Post
All this Mike Starr hating be gone

If they're good results, let's be positive - they're good results and he won the bet

Leave the dude alone
+1

it was a prop bet, why are we going into this so much? people make all kinds of stupid prop bets that are way more -EV than this and no one cares.

congrats on the win Mike, nice results. can we move on?
johnny_on_the_spot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 06:11 PM   #17418
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,102
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Wasn't this thread just permanently locked because of this **** going on in the last page? And the common denominator was ... Mike
johnnyBuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 06:25 PM   #17419
MikeStarr
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 7,978
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
Wasn't this thread just permanently locked because of this **** going on in the last page? And the common denominator was ... Mike
All I did was post info on a prop bet. Someone else posted about a prop bet over total volume and nobody picked it apart with a fine tooth comb. Besides, nowhere has anyone called anyone names, or said anything over the top. A few people said good job. A few people said it was a dumb bet and there was a discussion. I thought thats what this forum was for. To discuss poker related stuff. As long as its done respectfully, whats the problem?
MikeStarr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 06:32 PM   #17420
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 24,055
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyBuz View Post
Wasn't this thread just permanently locked because of this **** going on in the last page? And the common denominator was ... Mike


I agree thus my proposal of a containment thread for him. I'm not ****ting on him but he clearly creates a lot of content that is mildly off topic. Seems inane


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bwslim69 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 06:36 PM   #17421
bwslim69
I'm a Diva, Bruh
 
bwslim69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: TPS reports
Posts: 24,055
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
All I did was post info on a prop bet. Someone else posted about a prop bet over total volume and nobody picked it apart with a fine tooth comb. Besides, nowhere has anyone called anyone names, or said anything over the top. A few people said good job. A few people said it was a dumb bet and there was a discussion. I thought thats what this forum was for. To discuss poker related stuff. As long as its done respectfully, whats the problem?


The problem is that this thread inevitably devolves into your personal journal. Set up a pgc to discuss your prop bets, your hands, runbad, etc. You feel the need to respond to every mildly critical post directed to you.

I don't think it's entirely on you but that is the reality


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
bwslim69 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 06:49 PM   #17422
Garick
Oberbiergenießer
 
Garick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Do you even math, bruh?
Posts: 24,659
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
Besides, nowhere has anyone called anyone names, or said anything over the top. A few people said good job. A few people said it was a dumb bet and there was a discussion. I thought thats what this forum was for. To discuss poker related stuff. As long as its done respectfully, whats the problem?
QFT. Let's keep it true. No need to seek drama.
Garick is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 07:52 PM   #17423
VolumeKing
adept
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 729
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Sick results way to give some real world data to the winrates and bankroll thread
VolumeKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 07:56 PM   #17424
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwslim69 View Post
I agree thus my proposal of a containment thread for him. I'm not ****ting on him but he clearly creates a lot of content that is mildly off topic. Seems inane


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
IMO, main reason why he's tilting a lot of people is because his WR claims cannot be substantiated, and his strategy posts are highly suspect.

So when you keep reading these "successful" stories and brags from Mike, it induces people to challenge him, and that kind of challenges often lead to personal attacks, because Mike had a history of taking them personal.

FWIW, every time I read one of Mike's brags, I feel like poking holes into his claim as well...
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2017, 09:02 PM   #17425
Maskk
veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: DC Area
Posts: 2,083
*** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr View Post
The bet was for at least 100 hours but I kept going all month to make it harder to say it was a fluke.



I would say the biggest difference is that almost everyone has major leaks including sizing tells and paying off big bets. At 2/5 I see a lot less of that. Also, 1/2 players hardly ever put you to a big test like some 2/5 players do.



The preflop raise sizing tells at 1/2 are incredibly easy to spot if you are paying attention.


I'm guessing you are Playing an TAG style?

It's funny, my WR in bb/hr went up as my stakes moved from lowest to second lowest in a room (from 1/3 to 2/5). Probably due to my ability to both play deeper and villains increased bluffability at higher stakes...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Maskk 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 11:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive