High Stakes Poker

I didn't give this any thought at all, but it seems like an interesting case.

On September 25 2007 05:39 WiseAdvice wrote: seriously baal i know ur a 200nl grinder trying to be a 400nl loose-agressive-monster-boss but wtf man i mean u gotta be stupid to run it twice. U play poker cant be scared, u have 1 shot to win all the money 70/30

lol i love you too <3

as i said i would run it twice me holding JJ or AT... not because im scared, but because its neutrally EV, what part of that you dont get, imma message Myth here since he is the math wiz.


Think it this way... if instead of running it TWICE we run it one hundred times ok?... what will be the results? you will win 70% of the pot, same equity, just reducing variance, same as running it twice dude.

Tomson:

nvm your question is legit and catyoul responded well, you can still accept to run it twice since u increase your chance to win half of the pot. Expectation stays the same.

Even if you use no burn cards and run it as many times as you can until the deck is completely dealt out, you don't change the odds.

On September 25 2007 14:06 tomson wrote: But lets say you're down to 1 out. It's impossible to win the pot if you run it twice.

So ? That doesn't mean it's not the same average win.

You're right.

Agree with Catyoul.

god, not this shit again

On September 25 2007 15:09 sawseech wrote: god, not this shit again

lol i know, WiseAdvice was the one who started this shit and even called us idiots :D

no

anything catyoul says in regards to mathematics should be accepted as LAW

seriously, catyoul is right and anyone who disagrees with him about anything is wrong

I was pretty shocked when I realized running stuff twice didn't affect the equity each player is expecting

I always just assumed it gave a little equity away to the underdog

I still don't like running stuff twice though. It reduces the probability of Phil Hellmuth blowups, and plus, who cares about the short-term results anyway

reasons to run it:

you are playing outside your roll and/or don't have all of yourself

you suck and want to play fewer hands/hour and reduce the variance on those hands so that you lose slower

a fish insists on it and you want to keep him happy

no thats stupid casper


the only reason NOT to run it twice as jockals said is to pass on the oportunity on upseting Phil who tilts easily

and also its pretty gay and reduces the fun factor if one guy sucks out in 1 but loses the other pot, at least on HSP this thing should be banned seriously, so uninteresting.

Rofl. Apparently Hellmuth is stuck $536,000 against Ivey in Chinese poker, lulz. Ivey is a niggerish monster.

Somehow the little black kid in the Cincinatti Kid allways reminds me of phil ivey.

+ Show Spoiler +

On September 25 2007 17:06 locoo wrote: and also its pretty gay and reduces the fun factor if one guy sucks out in 1 but loses the other pot, at least on HSP this thing should be banned seriously, so uninteresting.

QF such confuscius-like T

we keep getting these huge pots going on HSP, or good-sized pots that could bust certain people... and it's exciting, awesome, somebody's going to be very happy about this and somebody else is going to be very angry about this and we get to watch the aftermath and see people get mad

but then hey, let's run it twice, chop chop, pot over like it never even happened, everybody's friends again... YAWN

it really really hurts my enjoyment of HSP, I wish they wouldn't allow this

indeed running it twice makes it a little bit more boring, Hellmuth would be steaming by now withouth the chop