How many hands to know sth? - Page 2

On May 06 2012 00:59 NeillyJQ wrote: True pro's don't need hh's, just cross fingers and call. :-)

lol solid

In NL 50k hands is about right - your winrate is probably very close to what it is. Of course a lot of people like to live in denial and think that their true win rate is a lot higher because they run below EV or whatever.

Yet specific decisions are made against randoms from a sample of 250 hands.

On May 07 2012 04:45 Twisted wrote: Having a higher winrate has nothing to do with variance lol. It just means that if your winrate is higher, that when you're running bad that you're only winning at 1bb/100 or losing just slightly. If your winrate is lower, obviously when the lower spectrum of variance sets in you're gonna lose more because your winrate (or in that case loserate) is smaller (loserate bigger).

yup, but some games/people play with a more varianceheavy style (NLFR has a different standard deviation than PLOHU for example), therefore, the samplesize required to determine if you're a winner at PLOHU is far bigger than for NLFR )

Regardless, there's so many factors that play a role in winrate calculations (ranges vs ranges, different kinds of flops etc) that it'll be hard to find out your true winrate.

But as far as I know, the goal of poker is not to find out your true winrate all this EVshit and stuff is just a tool you should use to determine in which games you should be playing at, to at least have some raw data to support/counter the human tendency to have an (over)optimistic view on their own skill level