ev at 100k hands

Very common.

~130BI in 230k hands:



from:
http://www.liquidpoker.net/blog/viewblog.php?id=1096322

lol...this is pretty standard

Use this simulator and type in your winrate and other stuff and see how common it is for winrate and ev to be far far apart.

http://pokerdope.com/poker-variance-calculator/

nice winrate btw

edit: just noticing you're icelandic...so now I feel weird responding in english

hahaha "defies statistic laws"

its very easy to have diverging lines over 1mi+ hands

i had a 220 buy in under EV stretch ones over 800k hands

[QUOTE][B]On December 01 2013 16:42 longple wrote:[/B

Don't know you well or anything but whenever I think of EV possibilities I think of your insane graphs back when you were 24 tabling 100nl.

On December 01 2013 13:52 voodoouser wrote: shouldnt my ev line match my win line at that point?

nope every hand is an independente event, all u can expect is to run equall to EV in next hands

This is normal. Think of it as flipping a coin. The odds are 50% and regardless of how many times in a row you have lost the 50% chance does not change. It is a feeling you have of being robbed. What you can expect is your edge (which btw changes in time) and what you are given is different. All you can do is keep putting in good effort.

I don't think that coin example is a good one in this situation, because although I'm not a statistics expert I'm pretty sure there would be a very high probability that the cumulative outcomes would be close to 50/50 over 100,000 trials. Maybe plus or minus 2-3% either way; which is why I think the OP is confused and thinks the EV should be close to actual winnings. And more odds of being even closer to 50/50 the higher you go. While its true each event is independent of the others, with something so set in stone like coin flipping you can be FAIRLY sure that it will balance out over many many trials. In the case with poker there are so many variables where we get it in good, bad, and close to 50/50 which throws in even MORE variance, because we have shifting probabilities with each action and so on. If I'm wrong someone with a strong math/statistic background please correct me.

It's funny to me how poker players are often more subject to gamblers fallacy than the fish. "I ran bad for a while so now I'm due some run good to get me back to average". Not how it works mate.

On December 01 2013 16:42 longple wrote: i had a 220 buy in under EV stretch ones over 800k hands

Omg that is the sickest thing I've heard of in my 9 years of poker. Graph?

On December 01 2013 22:50 goose58 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 01 2013 16:42 longple wrote: i had a 220 buy in under EV stretch ones over 800k hands Omg that is the sickest thing I've heard of in my 9 years of poker. Graph?

9 yers of poker and thats the sickest run youve heard of ? lol

It seems you people dont understand statistics, the bigger sample doesnt men the less variance, it means the less variance in relation to the # of hands, so 220bis below ev in 800k hands is less deviations away from the norm than 100bis in 100k hands.

So yeah if you have samples of millions of hands, you will have deviations of hundreds of buy-ins very often.

On December 01 2013 23:17 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On December 01 2013 22:50 goose58 wrote:   On December 01 2013 16:42 longple wrote: i had a 220 buy in under EV stretch ones over 800k hands Omg that is the sickest thing I've heard of in my 9 years of poker. Graph? 9 yers of poker and thats the sickest run youve heard of ? lol It seems you people dont understand statistics, the bigger sample doesnt men the less variance, it means the less variance in relation to the # of hands, so 220bis below ev in 800k hands is less deviations away from the norm than 100bis in 100k hands. So yeah if you have samples of millions of hands, you will have deviations of hundreds of buy-ins very often.

I've never seen a graph where someone is running 220 buyins below EV over 800k hands(although I know it's possible).

Never seen someone run 100 buyins below EV in 100k hands(although I know it's possible).

I guess there have been some guys who have had sicker runs into nosebleeds from nothing.

Who is running above EV over long-term?

coin example is bad in a case like this because it will basically always be near 50/50.

i think this is more of a case where solid players will be getting their money in ahead more times then not, so when they lose, their actual winnings takes a big drop compared to their EV line. for example, if you're all in vs a 2 outer and they hit, the difference between EV and actual winnings is 195%, and since you're probably losing more 95%ers than winning 5%ers, the actual winnings will never catch up to the EV.

just a thought i guess.

100 BIs in 100k hands is ridiculous. with a winrate of 3 BB/100, you'd have around 37% of your EV. THAT Is runbad.

On December 03 2013 03:53 Into Infinity wrote: coin example is bad in a case like this because it will basically always be near 50/50. i think this is more of a case where solid players will be getting their money in ahead more times then not, so when they lose, their actual winnings takes a big drop compared to their EV line. for example, if you're all in vs a 2 outer and they hit, the difference between EV and actual winnings is 195%, and since you're probably losing more 95%ers than winning 5%ers, the actual winnings will never catch up to the EV. just a thought i guess. 100 BIs in 100k hands is ridiculous. with a winrate of 3 BB/100, you'd have around 37% of your EV. THAT Is runbad.

This is fallacious reasoning. Getting it in ahead or behind does not affect your deviation from the ev line. On my iPhone so can't give a fuller explanation now sorry. Basically, winning more than 4 out of 5 80/20s is a good players way of sucking out.

On December 03 2013 05:21 Oly wrote: Show nested quote + On December 03 2013 03:53 Into Infinity wrote: coin example is bad in a case like this because it will basically always be near 50/50. i think this is more of a case where solid players will be getting their money in ahead more times then not, so when they lose, their actual winnings takes a big drop compared to their EV line. for example, if you're all in vs a 2 outer and they hit, the difference between EV and actual winnings is 195%, and since you're probably losing more 95%ers than winning 5%ers, the actual winnings will never catch up to the EV. just a thought i guess. 100 BIs in 100k hands is ridiculous. with a winrate of 3 BB/100, you'd have around 37% of your EV. THAT Is runbad. This is fallacious reasoning. Getting it in ahead or behind does not affect your deviation from the ev line. On my iPhone so can't give a fuller explanation now sorry. Basically, winning more than 4 out of 5 80/20s is a good players way of sucking out.

i'm basically saying that the only way for the EV line to become even with their actual winnings is to put themself in a bad spot and run good. if you lose your first 95/5 (out of 20), the chance of you breaking even is either 40% or 60% (rusty on probability), which, in either case, isn't exactly very high, so almost half of the people who lose their first 95%er will be running bad. in order to run good in this situation, you'd have to win 39 95/5s in a row, or put yourself in a 5/95 and win.

there are probably players out there with this exact same graph except their winnings is on the other side of the EV line.

On December 02 2013 01:25 goose58 wrote: Show nested quote + On December 01 2013 23:17 Baalim wrote:   On December 01 2013 22:50 goose58 wrote:   On December 01 2013 16:42 longple wrote: i had a 220 buy in under EV stretch ones over 800k hands Omg that is the sickest thing I've heard of in my 9 years of poker. Graph? 9 yers of poker and thats the sickest run youve heard of ? lol It seems you people dont understand statistics, the bigger sample doesnt men the less variance, it means the less variance in relation to the # of hands, so 220bis below ev in 800k hands is less deviations away from the norm than 100bis in 100k hands. So yeah if you have samples of millions of hands, you will have deviations of hundreds of buy-ins very often. I've never seen a graph where someone is running 220 buyins below EV over 800k hands(although I know it's possible). Never seen someone run 100 buyins below EV in 100k hands(although I know it's possible). I guess there have been some guys who have had sicker runs into nosebleeds from nothing.

ive ran 100bis under Ev in 100k hands at some point