ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS - Page 3 - Micro Stakes Pot Limit and No Limit

Some math:

Assumptions
Ignoring the buy in for the game ($5 or wtv)
Stacks represent % chance of winning.
You start down 0-1 with a 3:1 chip lead

Your chances for a victory are
75% * 50% = 37.5%

Just for the heck of it, let's assume that you play the game where you have even chips first, before you resume the match with a 3:1 lead.

50% * 75% = 37.5%

Please explain to me what I'm missing here, or how the math changes when the matches are being played simultaneously.

I guess this is what I don't see.

Heh, yeah.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:04 AM

#52

AJFenix

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 4,869

Quote:

.75= CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 2K-2K STACK AS TIEBREAKER(CHANCE I OF 3K-1K STACK WINNING)

.25 = CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 3K-1K STACK AS TIEBREAKER

Why does putting a "tiebreaker" label on the second table left make any difference? You still have to win both lol

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:04 AM

#53

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by TronSpecial

well i was gonna take imnotsogoods side on this. now i am left wondering how he got this far in the tournament in the first place.

Heads up, and why in particular are you wondering this?

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:05 AM

#54

DrGiggy

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 658

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood

Sure,

When you play 2 matches at the same time in hopes of one win you combine the tables(in theory) as if they were one, since only one win/loss is of concern @ this point.

.625 x {(.75).50+(.25).75} = .3516

.75= CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 2K-2K STACK AS TIEBREAKER(CHANCE I OF 3K-1K STACK WINNING)

.25 = CHANCE YOU WILL PLAY W/ THE 3K-1K STACK AS TIEBREAKER

not sure if I calculated speed of win properly in order to predict which stack is used in tiebreaker, but it seems relatively close to what it should be.

gnuhhhh stop it

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:07 AM

#55

Zergum

journeyman

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 303

ImNotSoGoodAtMaths.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:11 AM

#56

muttiah

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 25,025

lolol. Amazing thread

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:14 AM

#57

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJFenix

Why does putting a "tiebreaker" label on the second table left make any difference? You still have to win both lol

Its not the label, its the fact that when you are 0-1 you cannot play
your "next two tables" right away. Until you tie, you are playing for a possible "ONE" win.

You are dealt 50% of your hands from Deck A, 3k-1k Stacks

You are dealt 50% of your hands from Deck B, Table with 2k-2k Stacks

Until you get that one win at either table, you are playing a combo of both tables, and thus an avg of their win %.

Once you tie up, the remaining table just becomes the tiebreaker.

The problem is, the 3k-1k stack will be winning more quickly and more readily than the 2k-2k stack, which leaves us with the inferior stack in the tiebreaker more often than not.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:18 AM

#58

muttiah

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 25,025

Fail

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:19 AM

#59

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isura

Fail

Correct me you lowlife

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:20 AM

#60

muttiah

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 25,025

You were already corrected idiot.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:23 AM

#61

LuckyfishZ

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 2,361

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zergum

ImNotSoGoodAtMaths.

hahaha

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:25 AM

#62

billybeartku

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,830

msnl threads have never been this exciting to me as this one did to me.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:29 AM

#63

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zugwat

i just wanna say that making the thread wasnt about complaining about this dumb petty situation

i was just getting desperate as I legeitatly could of ended up staying the entire night playing the damn match and i was getting desperate and all i wantedd to do was get some sleep, was doing anything i could that might convince imnotsogood to let it pause

either way theres not much sense in even arguing this anymore

You are pathetic, and low for slandering my name for your own benefit. I guess you proved exactly what I was saying about your character. You can't just call someone scum and hope they 4get.

And lol @ u offering me a poker lesson as a compromise. Who the hell pays for your lessons, @ HUNLHE ? Drop some names, I'd like to know who to sit w/

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:43 AM

#64

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isura

You were already corrected idiot.

How much do you wanna prop bet that you are wrong?

(Meaning - It's not .5 x .75 = .375)

Quote

04-28-2009 , 05:55 AM

#65

charder30

formerly known as zj123

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 27,426

hof thread

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:01 AM

#66

billybeartku

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,830

i haven't seen any stars rated on this thread yet...i anticipated 5 stars.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:03 AM

#67

Bakes

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 15,980

lol nice math ImNotSoGood, wasn't there a point where you talked a lot of **** to me? dont quit poker you moron

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:11 AM

#68

djj6835

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 10,140

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood

Its not the label, its the fact that when you are 0-1 you cannot play
your "next two tables" right away. Until you tie, you are playing for a possible "ONE" win.

You are dealt 50% of your hands from Deck A, 3k-1k Stacks

You are dealt 50% of your hands from Deck B, Table with 2k-2k Stacks

Until you get that one win at either table, you are playing a combo of both tables, and thus an avg of their win %.

Once you tie up, the remaining table just becomes the tiebreaker.

The problem is, the 3k-1k stack will be winning more quickly and more readily than the 2k-2k stack, which leaves us with the inferior stack in the tiebreaker more often than not.

This is the part I don't understand. Why are you more likely to have the inferior stack at the "tiebreaker"? If you win the 3k-1k one then the 2k-2k is your tiebreaker. Why is it suddenly something other than 2k-2k just because you've been playing it during the 3k-1k one? The only way this is true is if you think the skill level isn't even in which case that would be factored into 0.5*0.75 calc too so yes you're expectation is less than that but it has nothing to do with adding the other table.

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:17 AM

#69

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by djj6835

When you're 2 tabling while still 0-1, your 3k-1k table is likely to win before the 2k-2k table for obvious reasons.

If you win the 3k-1k table, you are left with the 2k-2k table as your " tiebreaker "

By inferior i mean: 2k Chips(2k Starting) < inferior < 3k Chips(2k Starting)

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:22 AM

#70

tommyhawkers

adept

Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 808

i played him too. he ran v goot, i cant win as a fav obv.

but he also told me he didnt wanna begin 3rd table until the 2nd was finished and i was like lol wat why.

he tried to explain, i didnt understand but w/e i played along. also, i find it pretty amazing that imnotsogood made it as far as he did. congrats i guess

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:22 AM

#71

ImNotSoGood

adept

Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 977

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bakes

lol nice math ImNotSoGood, wasn't there a point where you talked a lot of **** to me? dont quit poker you moron

If i talked **** to you it was probably only in retaliation, people do like to hate on me, less now than b4 at least.

And why would i quit poker?

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:22 AM

#72

d2themfi

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 3,262

is this the part of the thread where stealthmunk comes in and berates imnotsogood for being an idiot, or does that come later

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:24 AM

#73

AJFenix

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 4,869

Quote:

Dude, you have to win BOTH either way, the two possible outcomes are you win both OR you lose the match, who cares if you win the 2k-2k first or the other one, the remaining is still left to be dealt with with the same amount of chips

The "your 3k-1k table is likely to win before the 2k-2k table for obvious reasons" statement implies that you're not realizing that sometimes you LOSE one before anything happens and therefor lose the match

Quote

04-28-2009 , 06:26 AM

#74

djj6835

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 10,140

Quote:

Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood

Ok so pretend instead of playing both at once you stop the 3k-1k and start a 2k-2k. Now if you win that one you start up the 3k-1k. Now your tiebreaker is the 3k-1k. How does that change your expectation at all? It's still 0.5 for going to the tiebreaker and then 0.75 for winning the tiebreaker instead of 0.75 for going to the tiebreaker and 0.5 for winning. Why does the order matter at all?