| Posted by: Cheetah at December 13, 2007, 12:07 am | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by aliengenius
You really should read the second one as well (it's really one big article, imo)...
I will AG. I just wanted to review the first one while it was still fresh in my head.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at December 13, 2007, 12:05 am | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by F Paulsson
My simulations were made to try to answer the question "how bad is ariance for someone with a small bankroll". Basically, I stipulated the following
a) I will beat my opponent for an amount that is proportional to the stakes I play, and
b) with higher ariance I'm more likely to go on swings that will force me to move down in stakes and therefore make proportionately less money until I'm back up to where I started.
Since moving down effectively halves my income (stakes are usually like that) the idea is (was) that the safer route might generate more money since it will not be at all as likely to risk moving down.
So I decided to test how ariance/EV effected money made. The simulator basically runs random all-in coin-toss situations where one guy will bet money on every toss that's 50% or better to win (pushing the edges, and the ariance, to the max) and the other guy will be more careful, only taking, say, 55%... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: aliengenius at December 12, 2007, 5:24 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by rufcut68
That's one of the best pieces of information that I have seen. If you want to see it in action look at the first or second hand of almost any large free roll. You would see most of the table if not go all in for the first or second hands.
Then a hand like Q3o wins with quad 3's.
Clearly you didn't read ery far Mr. ADD interwebs user.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: rufcut68 at December 12, 2007, 5:16 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
That's one of the best pieces of information that I have seen. If you want to see it in action look at the first or second hand of almost any large free roll. You would see most of the table if not go all in for the first or second hands.
Then a hand like Q3o wins with quad 3's.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: aliengenius at December 12, 2007, 4:58 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Cheetah
I only read the first article
You really should read the second one as well (it's really one big article, imo)...
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: F Paulsson at December 12, 2007, 12:47 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by Cheetah
FP, what kind of simulations have you done? I would be interested to see the results and any conclusions you have drawn from them.
My simulations were made to try to answer the question "how bad is ariance for someone with a small bankroll". Basically, I stipulated the following
a) I will beat my opponent for an amount that is proportional to the stakes I play, and
b) with higher ariance I'm more likely to go on swings that will force me to move down in stakes and therefore make proportionately less money until I'm back up to where I started.
Since moving down effectively halves my income (stakes are usually like that) the idea is (was) that the safer route might generate more money since it will not be at all as likely to risk moving down.
So I decided to test how ariance/EV effected money made. The simulator basically runs random all-in coin-toss situations where one guy will bet money on every toss ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Ronaldadio at December 12, 2007, 11:09 am | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Without going into too much detail, from my point of iew it helps with bad beats.
When you constantly make the correct move and get sucked out it can make you mad. However, I am now of the opinion where the situation described is not a big deal to me now.
If I`m sitting with AA I will make a semi standard raise. If a lot of ppl want to call, so be it. What I do know, however, is that at that time I am the fa to win the hand, all be it if overall I`m less than 50% 4 other callers. So I have made the correct move and I have made a lot of people made the wrong move.
Then you make your decision on the flop. The good news is, if your hand improves on the flop and u r sitting with the nuts, because the other ppl are looking at their holding and their holding only, u can then push and u will probably get a caller, or at worst win a bigger pot than u would normally have.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cheetah at December 12, 2007, 8:43 am | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by aliengenius
From this thread:
Refutation of schooling here and here.
I only read the first article and it is anything but refutation.
In order to investigate this issue, one must consider all possible hands and a ariety of players.
The author only considers maniacs who play any two hands and only two hands. On top of that, one of the hands is AA which is probably the worst hand to show fish schooling.
Despite these special circumstances, in the author's admission, he could observe schooling effect, but chose to label it small and disregard it.
He simply doesn't have the data to draw any conclusions. He has basically used 2 points: one type opponents against AJ or AA. One cannot extrapolate from this to all hands and all types of players. This would be like saying that since Cheetah was in his den on Sunday at 1pm and Friday at 1 pm, therefore he is always in his den.
As FP mentions, there are als... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Ronaldadio at December 11, 2007, 10:36 am | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
At last AG has found me the `Holy grail` or `The meaning of (poker) life`!!!
I`ve been trying to put a similar point across but not as well
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: zachvac at December 10, 2007, 9:02 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Quote: Originally Posted by aliengenius
From this thread:
Refutation of schooling here and here.
While I agree with the author, it's ery different in NL hold 'em. In limit, the max you'll lose after being outdrawn is 4 big bets on the river. In NLHE you could lose several times the pot size. What happens if for example you have AA and there are 5 people with draws. Paying one off when he hits is obviously -EV because if they all miss they most likely will fold to your bet. What happens when the river comes and you face a bet? It's possible it's a top pair that thinks it's good, it's possible that it's a bluff, and it's possible that they hit their set or gut shot. It's also possible that they already had a made hand (flopped a set or something). Even the worst players still make hands (and bet them). I'm pretty sure having lots of bad players in the game would still be +e and increase the ariance, but this article doesn't prove that, it only addresses limit, which is f... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: F Paulsson at December 10, 2007, 6:15 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Although I disagree with the idea of schooling being something that cuts into winrates, Cheetah doesn't seem to be primarily saying that, but rather that high ariance reduces winnings for people with strict bankroll management. However, and I believe this is key, high ariance only reduces profitability of it's high ariance but same EV. I ran quite a lot of simulations for this at one point, and unless I made the difference in EV almost 0, it was always better to choose the +EV, high ariance game for profitability.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Steveg1976 at December 10, 2007, 5:26 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
Interesting Article. I have never heard of schooling before. I can see why it would be an compelling argument for a person that keeps loosing to poor players. The articles do a good job of explaining why that isn't the case however, except in ery rare instances. I mean really how many times are you going to get 9 callers on the turn.
Thanks AG, I always love the links you provide to articles. I may not agree with them but that are always informative.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: aliengenius at December 10, 2007, 4:52 pm | | Topic: Schooling Forum: Card Chat |
From this thread:
Quote: Originally Posted by Cheetah
Actually, excluding the natural bias that may exist, some forms of poker are subject to more luck than others, especially against not ery good opponents.
All limit ersions of poker are ery succeptible to "fish schooling", where many bad players play incorrectly, but collectively, their bad plays are less bad because of the odds they create for each other.
A good player's edge is greatly diminished in such games since the odds of winning are much smaller than a table with say just a few fishies. That translates into much bigger ariance(even for passive tables, let alone wild tables). And big ariance reduces your profitability when you apply BR management.
If you play with ery good players, then I think the arious forms of poker are much closer with respect to skill level requirements.
Refutation of schooling here and here.
| | Static Link |
|