Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Online No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em online cash games of all stakes, including pot-limit and cap games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-28-2009, 05:02 AM   #51
AJFenix
Pooh-Bah
 
AJFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: twitch.tv/adrianfenixx
Posts: 4,869
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_Jim View Post
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.
AJFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:04 AM   #52
AJFenix
Pooh-Bah
 
AJFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: twitch.tv/adrianfenixx
Posts: 4,869
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

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
AJFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:04 AM   #53
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by TronSpecial View Post
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?
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:05 AM   #54
DrGiggy
grinder
 
DrGiggy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 658
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
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
DrGiggy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:07 AM   #55
Zergum
journeyman
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: vegas
Posts: 303
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

ImNotSoGoodAtMaths.
Zergum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:11 AM   #56
muttiah
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
muttiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,369
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

lolol. Amazing thread
muttiah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:14 AM   #57
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJFenix View Post
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.
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:18 AM   #58
muttiah
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
muttiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,369
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Fail
muttiah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:19 AM   #59
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isura View Post
Fail
Correct me you lowlife
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:20 AM   #60
muttiah
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
muttiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 24,369
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

You were already corrected idiot.
muttiah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:23 AM   #61
LuckyfishZ
veteran
 
LuckyfishZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,361
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zergum View Post
ImNotSoGoodAtMaths.
hahaha
LuckyfishZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:25 AM   #62
billybeartku
Pooh-Bah
 
billybeartku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Taipei, Taiwan. it ain't China yo!
Posts: 5,830
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

msnl threads have never been this exciting to me as this one did to me.
billybeartku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:29 AM   #63
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zugwat View Post
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/
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:43 AM   #64
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isura View Post
You were already corrected idiot.
How much do you wanna prop bet that you are wrong?

(Meaning - It's not .5 x .75 = .375)
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 05:55 AM   #65
charder30
formerly known as zj123
 
charder30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: mArYlAnD
Posts: 27,375
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

hof thread
charder30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:01 AM   #66
billybeartku
Pooh-Bah
 
billybeartku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Taipei, Taiwan. it ain't China yo!
Posts: 5,830
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

i haven't seen any stars rated on this thread yet...i anticipated 5 stars.
billybeartku is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:03 AM   #67
Bakes
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,945
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

lol nice math ImNotSoGood, wasn't there a point where you talked a lot of **** to me? dont quit poker you moron
Bakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:11 AM   #68
djj6835
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10,141
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
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.
djj6835 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:17 AM   #69
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by djj6835 View Post
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.

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)
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:22 AM   #70
tommyhawkers
adept
 
tommyhawkers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 808
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

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
tommyhawkers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:22 AM   #71
ImNotSoGood
adept
 
ImNotSoGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Tilted 5 Bet Bluffing
Posts: 977
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakes View Post
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?
ImNotSoGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:22 AM   #72
d2themfi
veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,263
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

is this the part of the thread where stealthmunk comes in and berates imnotsogood for being an idiot, or does that come later
d2themfi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:24 AM   #73
AJFenix
Pooh-Bah
 
AJFenix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: twitch.tv/adrianfenixx
Posts: 4,869
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
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)
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
AJFenix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:26 AM   #74
djj6835
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 10,141
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImNotSoGood View Post
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)
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?
djj6835 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:28 AM   #75
TronSpecial
veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,176
Re: ImNotSoGood is being OUTRAGEOUS

lol if you only 1 table then and win the one you are 3k-1k in then guess what happens... the tiebreaker is 2k-2k.
TronSpecial 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 03:41 PM.


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