I have been playing poker for 8 years and Im going to start by saying this:
Its not easy to win at poker, it takes a lot of hard work and dedication. Only a small % of poker players actually win money in the long run(due to rake from the house, and skill gaps etc.)
Lets assume we have no video footage of mike staring at his crotch every hand, lets say we have no footage at all of mike even playing poker.
Lets say his actions are not even suspicious. All we know are the numbers and were even going to skew them in mikes favour as much as possible.
I think most poker players would agree that the average live crusher
wins at an avg
big blind per 100 hands of
25bb/100(its probably less than that tbh).
For arguments sake, lets assume the best live poker cash game player in the
world right now is
Jimmy, lets say Jimmy's win rate is a whopping
50bb/100 when playing at stones live casino with a very
high
std deviation of 125(to increase variance). A winrate like this
is un heard of in poker but well assume its real just to help Mikes
case. The odds of Jimmy with this winrate going on a run similar
to Mike postles is
mathematically impossible and this can be calculated.
Now lets say Mike is even better than that. Lets ignore the interviews of mike actually explaining his thought process. Lets say Mike is a
"GOD". Lets give him a winrate higher than Jimmy. Lets say that Mike is 3 times better than Jimmy at a staggering
150bb/100 the best win rate the poker world has ever come close to seeing. Lets give him a high std deviation as well to increase his variance(
125). Mike played a lot of poker at stones and I think we can safely assume at an avg live game
(30 hands per hour) Mike has played close to
10k hands on film. People need to understand 10k hands is a lot of hands and can in fact prove many things. We don't know for sure yet what Mike's win rate is over those hands due to the many graphics errors but i think its very safe to assume he was winning anywhere between
600-1000bb/100, only time will tell.
Now, lets see what the probability of Mike(3 times better than the best live
player in the world) running at a whopping
600bb/100 over 10k hands actually is.
After simulating it on a widely used poker variance calculator(
https://www.primedope.com/poker-variance-calculator/)
We come to the conclusion that:
EV (»?«) 150.00 BB/100
Standard deviation (»?«) 125.00 BB/100
Hands(»?«) 10000
Expected winnings (»?«) 15000.00 BB
Standard deviation after 10000 hands (»?«) 1250 BB
12.50 BB/100
70% confidence interval (»?«) [13750 BB, 16250 BB]
[137.50 BB/100, 162.50 BB/100]
95% confidence interval (»?«) [12500 BB, 17500 BB]
[125.00 BB/100, 175.00 BB/100]
Probability of loss after 10000 hands (»?«) 0.0000%
Probability of running at or above observed win rate (600.00 BB/100) over 10000 hands with a true win rate of 150.00 BB/100 (»?«) 0.0000%
Probability of running below observed win rate (600.00 BB/100) over 10000 hands with a true win rate of 150.00 BB/100 (»?«) 100.0000%
Minimum bankroll for less than 5% risk of ruin (»?«) 156 BB
It is in fact
mathematically impossible for a man 3 times better than the current best player in the world to actually win at these rates over
a very big sample of 10,000 hands.
Online poker sites have in fact caught plenty of cheaters and bots in the past based on their win rates and gameplay alone. This man is cheating in broad daylight on camera and people are debating this?