Settle this Poker Theory / Sklansky bucks debate

[jono]

[ QUOTE ]
If you look at it from the other way around. Can you really look yourself in the face and honestly say a player who goes allin with KK 11 times vs AA, and wins 10 of them, is running neutral?

[/ QUOTE ]

Logically
I have already done the math

Intuitively
Player A won 10 pots against player B with X% equity. These were each $Y.
Player B won 1 pot against player A with X% equity. This pot was 10 x $Y.

[orentha]

it's pretty clear that the 2 players are running exactly at their expected value

i.e.: they are running neutral.

[JNuey]

From what I can tell they are both running neutral in both situations.

Though you did fail to mention that when they moved up in both situations, did they start with 100bb stacks? I think that fact could change the EV outcome.

[eMbAh]

wtf are you talking about?

the same hand plays 11 times and Player A wins 10 times as a 20% favorite. He is running super hot and has made alot -EV plays (considering he knows that the other player has aces)

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
@jono:
Depends on what you want to know. Do you want to know the EV in BB or the EV in $. Since different hands were played at different stakes the only way to determine if any player was running good or bad is by looking at the EV in BB when the money went in in comparison to the actual BB won.
@PantsOnFire:
No, you don't need to take in account the fact the hands were played at different stakes. If you want to determine your EV in BB it doesn't matter at what stakes the hands were played. A full buyin is 50 Big Bets at any stakes.

If you look at it from the other way around. Can you really look yourself in the face and honestly say a player who goes allin with KK 11 times vs AA, and wins 10 of them, is running neutral?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you believe this then really there's nothing we can do to help you.

[eMbAh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
@jono:
Depends on what you want to know. Do you want to know the EV in BB or the EV in $. Since different hands were played at different stakes the only way to determine if any player was running good or bad is by looking at the EV in BB when the money went in in comparison to the actual BB won.
@PantsOnFire:
No, you don't need to take in account the fact the hands were played at different stakes. If you want to determine your EV in BB it doesn't matter at what stakes the hands were played. A full buyin is 50 Big Bets at any stakes.

If you look at it from the other way around. Can you really look yourself in the face and honestly say a player who goes allin with KK 11 times vs AA, and wins 10 of them, is running neutral?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you believe this then really there's nothing we can do to help you.

[/ QUOTE ]

very interesting discussion : )

[josh_x]

IT DOESN"T MATTER
you can look at ev however the hell you want it doesn't make a difference. You can say 'oh man i lost with AA i'm so unlucky", yeah but you were lucky to get dealt AA in the first place etc etc. The only true ev is based on your true win rate vs your opponents true win rate. looking at this [censored] is completely useless.

[NoTurns]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
@jono:
Depends on what you want to know. Do you want to know the EV in BB or the EV in $. Since different hands were played at different stakes the only way to determine if any player was running good or bad is by looking at the EV in BB when the money went in in comparison to the actual BB won.
@PantsOnFire:
No, you don't need to take in account the fact the hands were played at different stakes. If you want to determine your EV in BB it doesn't matter at what stakes the hands were played. A full buyin is 50 Big Bets at any stakes.

If you look at it from the other way around. Can you really look yourself in the face and honestly say a player who goes allin with KK 11 times vs AA, and wins 10 of them, is running neutral?

[/ QUOTE ]
If you believe this then really there's nothing we can do to help you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I tend to agree. We obviously think on different levels.

[NoTurns]

[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly the thing NoTurns, BB do not matter at all. BB is deceiving because it can be .02 or $2000. It is not constant. Whereas dollars is always a constant measure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like I said, it can matter, it is a matter of perspective. And since your question was which player was running well, neutral or bad, BB (imho) is all that matters, and $ is not.

Furthermore, you don't need any calculations to see the EV $-wise for both players is neutral. This is because of the simple fact the less likely event happened 10 times in a row and then the likely event happened 1 time at exactly stakes 10 times as much. This little "trick" doesn't change the fact one player was running good and one player was running bad.

If you analyze your own game to see if you are running well or just got lucky, you will most definately draw the wrong conclusions if you only look at $ and say the BB are irrelivant. Theoretically you then should draw the conclusion that going allin with KK vs AA is nothing more than a coinflip. Do you see why? If that's the case (but I'm guessing it's not, for your sake)...I would really like to see you at my tables [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

[eMbAh]

Okay seriously explain this to me

Lets pretend that player A and B know each others hands so that the player with the kings makes a -EV play (Because it's obviously not +EV if he knows the other player has AA)

How can you say they are running neutral? Player B needs to suck out 9 times before they are running neutral vs each other

I don't understand this discussion because I thought this was common knowledge, am I wrong?