High Stakes Poker - Page 8

On September 25 2007 06:28 n1ck wrote: any of u guys got a pokerbay invitation u dont need? or maybe a non-pokerbay link for the episode? thanks in advance

http://www.pokertube.com/

Wow relax WiseAdvice, i'm just doing the math and i don't think i do it wrong, you can ask your friend about it he'll prolly come up to the same conclusions. And btw why in the world would hsp players accept to run it twice if it decreases their equity ? that would be fucking stupid.

btw i just turned 30. Have a good nigh Mr aggro drunk.

On September 25 2007 07:14 Sheitan wrote: Wow relax WiseAdvice, i'm just doing the math and i don't think i do it wrong, you can ask your friend about it he'll prolly come up to the same conclusions. And btw why in the world would hsp players accept to run it twice if it decreases their equity ? that would be fucking stupid. btw i just turned 30.

wait wait pal, i lied about retiring for the night im listening to 'prussian blue - 'ill bleed for your' (and thats just for fun)

but yo seriously last post of the night but man just answer this straight up are u trying to convince me that

jj vs a10 where u are 70/30 favorite = same expectation money wise as running it twice

if u think like this u should be burned at the stake like witch unless u 'confess' and realize its foolish to agree to run it twice jj vs a10

anyways wow cool just keep ur timid style.

long run no way its better to run it twice jj vs a10

we living on planet mars?? wow

gl yo see u at the tables

i come in peace just im wondering ppl actually believe that this is 50/50?? guess its 50/50 that world is flat lol silly kids ==; hope im right lol

it only reduces variance.. yes you only win both pot 49% of the time(as a 70% favorite).. but dont forget its almost impossible to lose both (only 9%)

Rofl seriously wtf ? show me where im wrong, be my guest. And like i told you why in the world would they accept to run it twice if they decrease their equity, please explain this to me.

It's hard to admit but you're fucking wrong. Period, admit it and try to understand why.

just wait until he sobers up and he will agree

meh

ax-bx=c
a^2x-b^2x+(0ab+0ba)=c

a=.7
b=.3
x=1000

.7(1000)-(.3)(1000)=400

.7^2(1000)-.3^2(1000)+(0*.7*.3+0*.3*.7)=c
.49(1000)-.09(1000)=c
490-90=400

nm i see what i did wrong!

definitely too early

On September 25 2007 07:31 Jelle wrote: just wait until he sobers up and he will agree

and really there is absolutely no reason for all the hating and flaming you put out here.

how can anyone hate in a thread that is tied to farha.

anything tied to farha is always <3

farha tilted so hard after first hand so it wasnt that great

even though he tilts, he's still fun.

he just overtilts

"i busted? fine i'm allin in the dark from now on!"

rofl!

Calculating it sound like a bitch if they would use diferent deck (whit cards already given to players removed) then it would obviously be 0 EV. The problem I have is that for example you got one common cards whit A, then it is less likely to win the second (difference is not small from ~30% to ~20%). Sure he can get J but it is less likely since there is 3A and 2J left.

While wast majority of flops where JJ wins, reduce no cards. There is also 5 cards less in deck but they don't change as much, right?

The problem summary two possibilities: common cards make JJ win (1), make AT win (2)
1 - most common cards change nothing in second run
2 - most common cards chances of second win significantly.

1 - It is very unlikely to win by outdrawing AT whit J after it hits.
2 - It is very unlikely to win whithout A.

Pokerstove:
equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 18.917% 17.37% 01.55% 238122 21186.17 { AhTd }
Hand 1: 71.433% 71.33% 00.11% 977723 1445.67 { JcJs }
Hand 2: 09.650% 08.10% 01.55% 111091 21186.17 { As2c }

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 28.738% 28.59% 00.15% 489544 2544.50 { AhTd }
Hand 1: 71.262% 71.11% 00.15% 1217671 2544.50 { JcJs }

equity win tie pots won pots tied
Hand 0: 29.704% 29.60% 00.10% 405793 1369.00 { AhTd }
Hand 1: 65.159% 64.25% 00.91% 880689 12482.50 { JcJs }
Hand 2: 05.137% 04.23% 00.91% 57938 12482.50 { Jd2s }

Sure there is more to it, but that is pretty much what makes me hard to accept that running twice change nothing.

Im too tired to do the math but yeah it's not 100% accurate since once u hit your out it's removed from the deck, so u're less likely to hit it on the second run. How does that affect the results:

You're less likely to win the pot when you're an underdog but so does it when you're the favorite. Therefore it converges to a tie, if i had to do proper math, i should consider all 4 cases: one hand improves the other don't, both hands improve(x2), none improve.

I won't do the math since it would take forever and it really doesn't worth it. In probability theory, expectation of the sum of random variables is the sum of their expectations, even if, like you told me they're not independent:

E(X+Y) = E(X) + E(Y)

what you're saying is that because variables X and Y are dependent:

E(X+Y) =/= E(X) + E(Y) which is false.

Please don't force me to do the equations, i need to do shit today.

Just found that btw:
http://www.barrytanenbaum.com/2006/02/21/thought-of-the-week-february19-2006/

WiseAdvice you're acting like an idiot or a drunk, or both. It'd be fine if you were right but you are wrong. It doesn't change a single cent of EV if you run it once or twice. Exact same thing. Exact.

You can discuss the effects on the game, meta considerations, etc. but as far as the hand itself is concerned, it doesn't change shit.

Funny Farha tilt btw.

You don't actually need any calculations to see that (and calculations could be annoying depending on how you do them, with all the outs counting and redraw possibilities).

Let's say we're allin and there are 5 cards to come. Forget about burned cards for the sake of simplicity, the cards to come are the 5 on top of the deck. Now imagine, instead of taking those 5 cards (that nobody has seen yet), I offer you to use the 5 cards from the bottom of the deck instead of those on top. Does your EV change ? Obviously no. What if we take cards 6-10 from the top of the deck ? Same thing, same odds, doesn't change a thing. Now let's put the top 5 cards of the deck aside, without seeing them yet. Let's also put the 5 next cards aside. Without seeing them, your EV is exactly the same on both of these potential boards, and is what you would usually consider your EV. Proof complete.

But lets say you're down to 1 out. It's impossible to win the pot if you run it twice.

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