QQ against 66 QT against Q9 AK against KQ KK against A5
everytime it was against some maniac who played around 85/11 so needless to say they were all (exept QT against Q9) all in preflop. And off course every F* time those donks hit. It was cash game so I really don't understand why you would go all in preflop with a medium stack with 66 against an other medium stack . oh well hopefully tomorow brings something better.
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
Posted by Whiskerer: Not really, that is pretty much the point of variance, you can win 100% of your flips one month, but that is by no means loaning it. Every time you flip you have 50 % of winning it roughly. If you have won 200 in a row in the past doesn't change things, since every one is irrespective of the ones in the past. I.E. you can't scout a roulet table for an entire day and wait for the time when black/red is due (hasn't been up for a long time) since every time it's 50/50.
The word "loaning" was ment to make it more understandable but I can see it had opposit effect
Ofcourse when you win a flip you win those money, and yes chance of winning next flip is the same even if you won 100 flips in a row which I didn't comment on btw. I said "loan" because you will lose as many flips as you win thats why it's 50/50. The money you win from a flip will be lost another day on a flip that's why I called it a loan. What I said was if you win 100% of your 50/50's over a long period you must exspect negative variance will hit you sooner or later cause 50% is 50% and will even out and become 50% in the long run. If you can prove that you win more than 50% of your flips over 1 mill hands(the more hands the more precise result, which means closer to 50%) or that you win more than 82% of your AA vs KK AI pre I would love to hear where you play?
Do you really think that the winning players are luckier than everyone else? No this is what poker is about, you can never effect the way the cards fall but you can make sure that you get your money in good. If you play AA vs KK AI pre 1 mill times and lose the first 100 times you will still end close to 81,946% wins after 1mill times and get closer and closer to the exact win % that AA got over KK the more times you do it.
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Sweden
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 188
No, you can't, but with millions and millions of players of course some will beat the odds even in the long run. If I'm lucky one day, that doesn't change anything for the next day, the odds doesn't take the past in account, odds are that in the future all your of your flips will end 50% meaning that everything you won the first day is still a pure win with no negative tags to it. If you do play AA vs KK and loose the first 100 times odds are that you will win 819,378.054 times and not 819,460 times that you were intially probable to win. Which means that you are still several wins short, sure things will even out, but the player who lucked out with his KK will never have paid back the loan for the times when he lucked out.
"I just ment in theory you can win 100% flips over a month or more but sooner or later you will lose more than you win on your flips so things even out. 50% is 50% so when you win a flip and is all happy about it just remember you didn't win those money only loaned them untill next race."
Was your exact words, which clearly suggest that for every flip you have won you will loose one. Which is not the case, rather for every flip you will win you will loose one, you can't take the past into account. Meaning, if you simplify it, if you have had 3 months of luck, doesnt mean that out of the future 24 months only 10,5 of them will be lucky but rather 12. So, sure you will come closer to neutral but in no way should you see every lucky draw as a loan which will be paid back by being outdrawn more in the future.
Edit: I don't think you really understand variance, odds are that from this very point your variance will even out to 50% if we are talking flips. But not over all time, you are no more likely to be hit hard by variance just because you havn't been in the past. Since as you agree for every coin flip it is 50 %, regardless of your past flips, odds are not that for every "extra" flip you won today you will loose it again tomorrow or the next day and so forth, odds are still that you will win 50% of tomorrows flips, and 50 % of the next and once again so forth.
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
Posted by Whiskerer: No, you can't, but with millions and millions of players of course some will beat the odds even in the long run. If I'm lucky one day, that doesn't change anything for the next day, the odds doesn't take the past in account, odds are that in the future all your of your flips will end 50% meaning that everything you won the first day is still a pure win with no negative tags to it.
Wonder why you keep mentioning this you are the only one talking about this ?
"No, you can't".....can't what?
The more times you play 2 specific hands against each other the closer you will get to the correct/precise winning % which is the same as saying it will even out in the long run.
------------ Im affraid it's you who doesn't understand the word variance.
"I just ment in theory you can win 100% flips over a month or more but sooner or later you will lose more than you win on your flips so things even out. 50% is 50% so when you win a flip and is all happy about it just remember you didn't win those money only loaned them untill next race."
Was your exact words, which clearly suggest that for every flip you have won you will loose one. Which is not the case, rather for every flip you will win you will loose one, you can't take the past into account.
Im not going to defend the way you interpret my words.....reread or forget about it and good luck with winning more than 50% of your races
BTW you got same chance of winning 10 flips in a row as you got losing 10 flips in a row. You can win sick many flips in a row but at some point you will lose sick many races in a row and thereby your flips will even out and end at 50% wins.
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Sweden
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 188
I meant that you can't change the cards as you said. You are wrong, odds it will get closer to even, not that it will get even. The truth is that from every single point in time odds are that your luck will even out, so all the "luck" you have had in past won't get negated by bad luck in the future. My point is that you can't look at it like a loan. In your other post you said that if you have won more flips than you loose one day odds are you will soon loose it again, which isn't true, but rather that the small portions of you have had will be like a tear drop in the ocean after millions of hands played, but odds are you will still have those "extra" dollars you won by luck even in the long run.
Lets take an example, lets say that you win an avarage of 100 $ a day assuming your luck avarages out. But you run lucky for the first two months and win 250 $/day. Then you play for another 5 years, odds are that you will be up to 198,000 $, and not the 188,700 $ that you would have originally been likely to win by playing 5 years and 2 months. The longer you play odds are you will get closer and closer to 100 $/day but odds are also that you will always be the 9,300 $ you won the first two months ahead of it.
My point is that you can't look at every piece of luck with a destiny of bad luck in the future.
Edit: No I do get the word variance, but you keep suggesting that there is some sort of memory to the cards, the say that it will even out from a specific point in time not over all.
"BTW you got same chance of winning 10 flips in a row as you got losing 10 flips in a row. You can win sick many flips in a row but at some point you will lose sick many races in a row and thereby your flips will even out and end at 50% wins."
The odds are not that they will end up at 50% wins, but 50% from now. Lets say that you have won 100 flips in a row, every time you flip from that point that odds are still 50/50 so the odds say that even if you flip 1,000,000 times more you will still be 100 wins ahead, which is a lot closer to 50% but odds are you will never hit exactly 50% wins. If you have studied probability you would know this.
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
"My point is that you can't look at every piece of luck with a destiny of bad luck in the future."
I don't and have been trying to explain it to you. But I got the sense that you misunderstood something and now you hang on to it no matter how I explain my self so I will let you be.
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Sweden
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 188
"You can win sick many flips in a row but at some point you will lose sick many races in a row and thereby your flips will even out and end at 50% wins."
There, you clearly suggests that you over all will win as many flips as you loose, but that only applies to future ones. You can't factor in the ones that has already happened, which is what this case is about.
"I just ment in theory you can win 100% flips over a month or more but sooner or later you will lose more than you win on your flipsso things even out. 50% is 50% so when you win a flip and is all happy about it just remember you didn't win those money only loaned them untill next race"
But that isn't the case, once you have won a flip you are ahead and will still probably win 50% of your future ones, you are no more likely to run into bad luck in the future just because you have had good luck in the past.
But please if you have any other definition of loan, explain it to me, 'cause in my book the point of a loan instead of a gift is that it has to be paid back, and that is not the case with odds, no matter how many flips you have won, odds are always that you will win 50% of your future ones.
"50% is 50% so when you win a flip and is all happy about it just remember you didn't win those money only loaned them untill next race"
Then what is the problem with winning a flip? There is no definition that makes loan a correct word, either you don't understand probability or you expressed yourself in the wrong way.
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
"But please if you have any other definition of loan, explain it to me, 'cause in my book the point of a loan instead of a gift is that it has to be paid back, and that is not the case with odds, no matter how many flips you have won, odds are always that you will win 50% of your future ones."
OMG you are a slow dancer reread #23 allready tried to explain it to you.
If you win 100 flips in a row you are experiencing positive variance.
If you lose 100 flips in a row you are experiencing negative variance.
These two even each other out in the long run and no you can't exspect positive variance because you experienced negative variance.
The discussion is neverending when you keep drilling in the first thing you misunderstood even though I explained it several times.
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Sweden
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 188
But the thing is that it is possible to have more positive variance than negative variance no matter how long you play. And the odds say that positive and negative variance will even out from a specific time, not over all. You say: "The money you win from a flip will be lost another day on a flip that's why I called it a loan." Which is no the case, if you win all your flips one day, odds are still that you will win 50% of your flips the next day, so no you odds are you won't loose that money in another flip. So, no, calling it a loan is just wrong. Just because odds from the start are that you will experience as much negative as positive veriance doesn't mean i will necessarily become so, which is the point of variance just as some days are lucky and some not some players will have more good luck and bad and other will have more bad than good.
From every point in time odds are that you will win as many flips as you have lost meaning that odds are that you will keep every $ you have won in lucky flips not that you will loose them in future flips as you suggest, so yes now we are arguing the same point, but the use of the word loan with any definition is wrong, which was my point from the beginning and still is.
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
Time has nothing to do with it everything is in number of hands.
Can you teach me how to win more than 50% flips ?
OK can't help my self....I will try last time.
Let's say a breakeven player starts withdrawing all money he wins from flips this will result in bankrupt cause he will meet negative variance in his flips at some point which he can't afford.
I hope you understand me now cause I wont spend any more time on this.
------------ Yes you force me to edit......every time I answer your post I see when im done that you totally edited your post which force me to edit so I answer your edited post and not the original
Joined: Apr '08
Location: Sweden
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 188
RE edits, and you do the same, its a circle of edits.
Sure, it's not that hard, just get lucky. You can't manipulate it so that you win more than 50% flips, but my point is that some player will no matter how many hands you take into account. Luck is a very real factor in poker, even though you probably can beat it by playing enough hands.
You probably know what a probability space is, if not it's basicly a gathering of every possible outcome, let's say we are going to flip a coin four times, now the odds are that most likely we will get 2 heads and two tails. Same as you will win 50% of your flips. This would give us the probability space: {h,h,h,h} , {h,h,h,t} ... , {t,t,t,t} i hope you get it, and all of them is just as likely.
But my point is that if you already have positive variance over all, odds are you will always have positve variance over all, no matter how many hands you play. We apply this to the coin toss, let's say we flip it once and it comes up heads, now odds are no matter the number of flips you will have had more heads than tails, since we can weed out all of the outcomes that doesnt have a heads first we get: {h,h,h,h} , {h,t,h,h} , {h,h,t,h} , {h,h,h,t} , {h,t,t,h} , {h,t,h,t} , {h,h,t,t} , {h,t,t,t} One again all of which is equally likely. i.e. odds are that you will get a total of 2.5/4 heads, instead of the original 2/4. And this applies no matter how many flips you make (after assuming that the first one was heads), but it will get closer and closer to 50% heads as you have said, but it will never get there, even if you flip an infinity of coin odds are you will only get inifinitly close to 50%. Sure you can't expect to always have positive variance, but my point was that for every flip you do win, ever day/month/year with good variance you should be happy, 'cause you are no more likely to have negative variance than anyone else next day/month/year, which is suggested by saying that a streak of good luck is just a loan for when you do get bad luck.
Joined: Nov '08
Location: Romania
Age: 33 (M)
Posts: 49
I agree with Mr Wiskerer the main thing you need to understand is that you have a really really really small chance of winning all the flips you play in you're lifetime (if it's 2 flips you have 25%, 3 flips =12.5%, 4 flips =6.25% and so on) if you win 1000000 flips in a row it dose not influence you're future flips
edit: you could also lose 1000000 flips and that dose not mean you will win the next 1000000 flips for it to be 50% 50%(although after losing 10000 flips in a row I think I would quit poker )
Posted by weakminded: I just lost myself 4 buy ins this evening
QQ against 66 QT against Q9 AK against KQ KK against A5
everytime it was against some maniac who played around 85/11 so needless to say they were all (exept QT against Q9) all in preflop. And off course every F* time those donks hit. It was cash game so I really don't understand why you would go all in preflop with a medium stack with 66 against an other medium stack . oh well hopefully tomorow brings something better.
As I said. You are going all in too easily.
Look at the hands you went all in with. Only one of them is justifiable, and thats KK. Anyone knows that with KK you are a sucker to any Ace so its a risk.
IF you are shoving in your whole buy in with QQ, QT and AK then no offence, you are going to get stung and people will know that you are going in with marginal hands and will take risks against you.
You are vastly over valuing your hands and any player worth his salt will know that and play against you accordingly.
Try restricting your range for going all in pre flop to AA and KK then after the flop only shove all in if you have at least 4 of your cards in play ie two pair as a bare minimum.
Shoving all in with just two of your cards being worth anything is suicide and over time you wll lose more flips than you win.
------------
Posted by Whiskerer: RE edits, and you do the same, its a circle of edits.
Sure, it's not that hard, just get lucky. You can't manipulate it so that you win more than 50% flips, but my point is that some player will no matter how many hands you take into account. Luck is a very real factor in poker, even though you probably can beat it by playing enough hands.
You probably know what a probability space is, if not it's basicly a gathering of every possible outcome, let's say we are going to flip a coin four times, now the odds are that most likely we will get 2 heads and two tails. Same as you will win 50% of your flips. This would give us the probability space: {h,h,h,h} , {h,h,h,t} ... , {t,t,t,t} i hope you get it, and all of them is just as likely.
But my point is that if you already have positive variance over all, odds are you will always have positve variance over all, no matter how many hands you play. We apply this to the coin toss, let's say we flip it once and it comes up heads, now odds are no matter the number of flips you will have had more heads than tails, since we can weed out all of the outcomes that doesnt have a heads first we get: {h,h,h,h} , {h,t,h,h} , {h,h,t,h} , {h,h,h,t} , {h,t,t,h} , {h,t,h,t} , {h,h,t,t} , {h,t,t,t} One again all of which is equally likely. i.e. odds are that you will get a total of 2.5/4 heads, instead of the original 2/4. And this applies no matter how many flips you make (after assuming that the first one was heads), but it will get closer and closer to 50% heads as you have said, but it will never get there, even if you flip an infinity of coin odds are you will only get inifinitly close to 50%. Sure you can't expect to always have positive variance, but my point was that for every flip you do win, ever day/month/year with good variance you should be happy, 'cause you are no more likely to have negative variance than anyone else next day/month/year, which is suggested by saying that a streak of good luck is just a loan for when you do get bad luck.
There is a flaw in your argument here.
You are taking it that every flip has a 50% chance of winning every time, when in truth that is far from the case.
If I go all in with AK against 2 3 one milliion times it is wrong to say that you would expect to win in 50% of the cases. Yes you could lose the first 100 but over a million efforts you can reliably expect to win far more than you would lose. Its that theory that makes pot odds so invaluable.
If you have a hand which is likely to win 30% of the time that would mean if you played the hand 10 times you are likely to win 3 of them and lose 7. THerefore anytime you make a call you have to ensure that whatever you would win would be enough to compensate for the 7 times you lost.
Joined: May '08
Location: Germany
Age: 59 (M)
Posts: 6786
Posted by M3turbo: What I said was if you win 100% of your 50/50's over a long period you must exspect negative variance will hit you sooner or later cause 50% is 50% and will even out and become 50% in the long run.
Nope. Remember, the results form a gaussean curve and no dirac function. If you make 1 million flips, a result of exactly 500.000 to 500.000 is extremly unlikely.
Joined: Mar '08
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 44 (M)
Posts: 6714
HEHE seams ppl dont quite grasp it. Well I dont care lol, im riding on the 75% wave and it feels good. When im driving down a road at 40MPH and a fly flys towards me at 20 MPH and hits my windscreen there comes a point when the fly has to go same direction as me, so atsome stage it has to travill at 0MPH to turn around, so did my car stop? THEORY
Joined: Dec '07
Location: Denmark
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 2644
Posted by shokaku:
Posted by M3turbo: What I said was if you win 100% of your 50/50's over a long period you must exspect negative variance will hit you sooner or later cause 50% is 50% and will even out and become 50% in the long run.
Nope. Remember, the results form a gaussean curve and no dirac function. If you make 1 million flips, a result of exactly 500.000 to 500.000 is extremly unlikely.
Yes it's very hard to hit exactly 50% but the more times you do the same flip the closer you will get to 50%.
. oh well hopefully tomorow brings something better.
