oh really?

And the thread grows some more. In before merge.

In after merge. Took me a while to find it - page 4?? That must be a record!

maybe they are giving up.

There is no reason whatsoever that the statistics of hands the players chose to play to the turn or river, should follow the same distribution as if ALL hands were played to the turn or river. They don't, they won't, and they shouldn't. The probabilities are useful to know to make decisions during play (and are close enough to be practical and useful), but the removal effects from player decisions alter the distribution of the cards that get dealt. The full distribution (random) includes all the turns and rivers that you do NOT see, and the ones you DO see are selective.

Let me give you one simple example. In heads-up NLHE, an Ace on the river would be expected to show up 1/13 or 7.69%. In actual play, where players tend to get to the river a lot more often when they are holding an Ace in their hand (removing it from the possible cards that can be dealt to the board) the removal effect in multi-million hand samples is about 250 per 100,000 Aces less than the random expectation. On the other end, deuces show up on the river almost that amount more than a random distribution, for the same reason. Combined, that's over 4% more deuces showing on the river than Aces. That's huge, but real. This skew towards low cards on the board is fairly well known, and it's only one example.

Another huge flaw in the post a few posts back is that the difference always needs to be measured in units of standard deviation or standard error, which takes the sample size into account. If I flip 2 coins and they both come up heads, I've gotten 100% more heads than expected. But measure that in standard deviations and it's insignificant.

I'm quantifying some of those removal effects in my research project. I'm getting close to having some stuff to publish.

I have a challenge for omaha players on FTP. Cover the screen so that you can only see 3 of your 4 cards and try to guess the 4th card. The very first time I did this, I guessed correctly. I was was dealt 3c7dTc and couldn't see the fourth card but something told me that it was the 7c and of course I was correct. There is a program that they use, it isn't random, and if you play a significant amount, I bet you might subconsciously see patterns.

/thread

A pattern mapping mind is a terrible thing to waste.

Any of you watch the final table of the WSOP? Life is rigged. Get over it.

I did, and if you cover the right hole card on your TV, you should be able to guess it 100% of the time based on the left card.

Seems you are right.

Only problem is when middle hands are played since they win too much, so factor for that.

Wait...so you can predict what cards are going to come and yet you STILL choose to play live over online? If you can predict the cards why aren't you making millions online?

Clearly PJ is delusional, but besides that, I find it hilarious how most of the time a rigtard insults someone's intelligence they make a grammar mistake that should have been taught to them in Grade 1. I am a fan of irony though, so please keep it coming rigtards

Maybe I'm missing something, why did you expect 17.4%?

Chance of your two cards + 5 board cards making no pair should be:

1 * 48/51 * 45/50 * 42/49 * 39/48 * 36/47 * 33/46 = 32.4%

This is assuming you play every hand to the river irrespective of the board etc, so you would expect to see rather less 'no pair' hands than this, but I have no idea where 17.4% comes from.

Well, it sounds so exact so it must be accurate. That's my theory on his made up stuff.

He seems to have vanished anyway, which is probably one of his best EV moves. Hard to see him holding his own vs real stats guys who look at his data.

Still, props for the new "middle hands" theory. That's up there with the mafia, entropy effects and super bots for creativity.

The thing people don't realize is that even over the course of a long time, from a statistical view point, that's still a short time. The odds state that when you add every single hand up from every single person who has ever played, AA beats KK about 80% of the time.

Besides, I've always had the view point that if you truly believe online poker is rigged, and you're still playing it, then you're an idiot.

No, they don't. That's only when they are all-in preflop with no other opponents. In all other scenarios, the odds are different.

That also isn't necessarily true.
If an event has an 80% chance to occur, it only takes 4300 trials to have 95% expectation of being between 79% and 81% on the outcomes. Raise that to 16000 trials, and you are 99.9% sure to hit in that range.

How long it takes to converge to the mean depends on what the mean actually is, and what kind of distribution you are talking about.

Give my hand histories for the last year(TheOrphan on FullTilt) and have one of you math experts figure out if it's possible for anyone to run as bad as I do. I am favored every big pot, every single day of my life and lose at such an astronomical rate it's not fathomable. I can not possibly lose 96% of all Ak vs A rag, KK vs A rag and 88 vs A rag for years. It is not possible to run as bad as me. I will bet anybody on this planet that my hand histories make zero mathematical sense. I'm down to 20 people in 9 out of 10, 90 person sitngo's and never win one pot after that and my money always goes in favored. The only time I ever win is when I get my money in like a donkey which is 1 out of 100 times.

proof itt

theorphan on FTP correct?

if so, jesus christ dude sharkscope says you've played less than 800 sngs lifetime. that's hardly a sample worth analyzing. there are grinders who play that amount in 2 weeks. do you honestly think they win every week no matter how good they are? if you were running as bad as you claim you'd be down money, not up a bunch

[ ] OP understands variance even a little bit

start throwing some pt3 stats up man

OOO goody I think this guy has it....

Most amazed at this:

journeyman


Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 238

What have you been doing for 2+ years and in your 238 posts????

Thread has zero potential for ending well for you, OP.

Present your hand history with the Math.

I haven't won 1 out of 20 times as a 6/5 favorite, a 2 1/2 to 1 favorite or a 4 1/2 to 1 favorite with 20 people or less left in months and I get it in like this 15 times a day. Are these *********** kidding me?

How do I get 30000 hand histories?

wat?