***Official May Non-Nit Chat Thread***

[jhill3535]

grouchie, click the ETW square. Your really need that line to compare the green one to.

[Cry Me A River]

The thing is, if you are a good player, particularly if you are TAG and reasonably straightforeward (you're not getting into a ton of non-standard situations like betgo or Carter might) you have a much better chance of running bad than good.

I'll super-simplify this to illustrate my point.

If,

Running good is winning when you're behind.
Running bad is losing when you're ahead.
Running average or neutral is winning exactly what you should.

So take one hand. You get it all in as a 60% favorite.

If you win, you run average. You were expected to win that pot.
If you lose, you're running bad. You lost when you should have run.

It is impossible for you to run good!

60% of the time you will run average. And 40% of the time you will run bad.

40% is a huge, huge chance of running bad!

The only way to run good is to get it in when you are behind. If you're a good player, that's just not going to happen nearly as often as the times you get it in ahead. This is particularly true if you get it in a lot when you aren't a huge favorite - ie 50% to 60% equity. It's not really spectacular for a coin to come up heads four or five times in a row, but if you then just add up all that lost equity it will look like a huge total but you really weren't that far ahead in the first place.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
It is impossible for you to run good!


[/ QUOTE ]

Cry Me A River,

the Sklansky Bucks calc takes all of this into consideration. Whether you are TAG, LAG, or HAG should have no bearing on your expected results from your all-in equity.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
The only way to run good is to get it in when you are behind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh?

What if you get it in 5 times with AA against underpairs and you win everytime? This is running good because your opponent is supposed to win once.

[Cry Me A River]

In other words. If you played absolutely perfect poker and only got it in when you're ahead the best you could possibly do is run exactly "average". It would be impossible to run good and it would be a virtual certainty that you would run bad given the variance. In fact, running average actually becomes the limit of the function. Only as you approach infite hands you will approach running exactly "average".

So in fact the vast majority of good players should run bad. And the more hands they play the greater likelyhood of variance compounding itself and moving away from the "average". While theoretically over infinite hands you should approach running exactly "average" the reality of the situation is the farther away you move from this ideal, the more you would have to run good to get back to average.

And as I've shown, running good is very, very hard to do.

[Mr_Donktastic]

Grouchie it looks like when you get your money in you have the best of it and win what is expected. But you are losing money in all of the other hands that don't go to showdown. Maybe you fold to much? What is your wtsd/w$sd in this sample?

[TheProdigy]

Pokerboy; when it comes down to it, it is just a completely unnecessary risk for a tiny extra percentage compared to what they already make.

There isn't enough incentive to risk losing every single customer to make that percentage. They wouldn't be doing promotions to gain customers if they cared that much about money or if they cared so little about keeping/gaining customers.

This is my last two months:
found 556 headsup allin situations
won: 361 lost: 173 tied: 22
average potsize: 88.36$
average ev: 0.6145
money won: 32154.10$
money expected (based on allin equity): 29779.42$
money difference: +2374.68$
max money diff: 2007-05-21 16:52:15-04 at +2537.83$
min money diff: 2007-04-09 21:38:28-04 at -403.64$
total_bet: 23996.05$


I think the difference might have something to do in playing styles..not sure, but I think the LAGs look like they are running good(as posted above, I prob get it all in with the worst of it a lot more often). I also think it might be a little obvious that I am one of the high volume winning players, so why aren't they punishing me?

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
In other words. If you played absolutely perfect poker and only got it in when you're ahead the best you could possibly do is run exactly "average".

[/ QUOTE ]

What?!

[TheProdigy]

Also, if you notice, my expected value is way higher. I am getting it in with the better money much more often than you, so it makes it look like I'm running better(as in I get in 100 with a 61% edge, I am supposed to win 61 but I win 100 when I win ; you get it in with a 54% edge, and it makes a difference, it only takes a tiny bit of bad luck to make it look like you are getting murdered with cards)

Edit: The avg ev thing does mean my expected value every time I put the money in, right? I hope I'm reading that as every time I am all-in I have been a 61% fav, because if not I look like a douche heh..

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the difference might have something to do in playing styles..not sure, but I think the LAGs look like they are running good

[/ QUOTE ]

IT'S ALL-IN EQUITY. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW YOU PLAY.

And congrats on the good run BTW. You are gonna be in big trouble when that eventually evens out.