Worst run ever!

ew

nasty stuff

I've said it once and I'll say it again - do yourself a favour and uninstall that program and never pay attention to it

On February 25 2008 00:03 sOah wrote: I've said it once and I'll say it again - do yourself a favour and uninstall that program and never pay attention to it

What's the reasoning? Do you think the algorithms it uses are flawed? I can't really speak towards the Sklansky bucks chart, but the 'all-in luck' chart seems pretty accurate.

these ar epretty stnd graphs. if u havent seen them before then u run like god. just uninstall the retarded program IMO

On February 25 2008 00:23 D_Zoo wrote: these ar epretty stnd graphs. if u havent seen them before then u run like god. just uninstall the retarded program IMO

I'm still not understanding the hate for the program. Are you guys questioning the data it's spitting out, or the fact that people use them to fund annoying 'I run so bad' posts?

I also don't agree that these are standard graphs. Obviously horrible runs are part of poker [even over 100k samples.] I'm well aware of that. I posted this because this is the worst I've run in my 2+ years of playing the game.

wow if thats ur worse run then u should be happy man, seriously not being an ass. The graphs are very bias IMO towards showing how bad u run is what I was referring too and makes u adopt the 'feel sorry for me' approach as opposed to fixing possible leaks or weak spots in ur game even for good players. Im saying this cuz it happened with me and lots of people I know so nothing meant negative towards u at all.


and if these graphs aren't fairly stnd for u then i wish i was u! =)

and yet the questions remains... in what way these graphs are flawed?

I am talking about the all-in showdowns cause you can have 2 values

a) $ amount
b) your equity

this gives one graph,
the other is the actual wins, and in the long run they should match or and short term kindda play around each other, sometimes up and down.

Personally I was just curious to graph these, I wasn't making excuses or anything at all... its something I did after going over my hands and just for the fuck of it basically...

I guess it depends what you mean by 'worst run'. In terms of money lost in a medium time frame, it was probably like $12,000 [20 buy-ins] playing 3/6 6-max sometime last year. Over maybe 20,000 hands.

Even though I'm still [barely] making month this month, I feel like this run is WORSE as I'm running over 30 buy-ins below expectation over a much, much longer period of time.

In terms of PokerEV itself, yeah it's obviously not the most useful for picking out specific leaks. I think there is some value in studying the difference between one's showdown winnings [blue line] vs total winnings [green line.]

the question you should be asking yourself is what the hell are you getting out of being able to put a 'number' on how bad you're running? nothing but bad things can come of this so there's the only answer you will ever need.

sOah, I agree with you man. In fact all graphs are stupid and waste of time... still neat to look at it at the end of the day.

I am looking for a mathematical explanation or just a technical description of why the ALL-IN graph is flawed...even if its just inaccurate it should give a rough magnitude of your equity lost to suckout.

On February 25 2008 01:48 sOah wrote: the question you should be asking yourself is what the hell are you getting out of being able to put a 'number' on how bad you're running? nothing but bad things can come of this so there's the only answer you will ever need.

Wait, should I still ask myself the question when you've already given me the answer?

I think you're kinda over-reacting. I wanted to make a short blog post about my recent bad run, and the PokerEV graphs seemed like a nice way to supplement the post. That's it.

Certainly wallowing over a bad run of cards isn't going to be helpful to my long-term success, but that's not what I'm trying to do here.

On February 25 2008 02:08 Pillars wrote: Show nested quote + On February 25 2008 01:48 sOah wrote: the question you should be asking yourself is what the hell are you getting out of being able to put a 'number' on how bad you're running? nothing but bad things can come of this so there's the only answer you will ever need. Wait, should I still ask myself the question when you've already given me the answer? I think you're kinda over-reacting. I wanted to make a short blog post about my recent bad run, and the PokerEV graphs seemed like a nice way to supplement the post. That's it. Certainly wallowing over a bad run of cards isn't going to be helpful to my long-term success, but that's not what I'm trying to do here.

"over-reacting"? lol I'm not reacting to anything other than the fact that people seemed genuinely surprised that I consider this program more destructive than it is constructive. I gave you my answer to the question I would recommend you ask yourself and fwiw I obv QFT all of D_Zoo's posts here, you are a lucky pos if this is the worst run you've ever had lol!

So you're not trying to wallow over a bad run of cards, you're trying to vent frustration with this being a very effective method for some to do so - that's cool carry on if it works for you imo

On February 25 2008 02:00 tilted fish wrote: sOah, I agree with you man. In fact all graphs are stupid and waste of time... still neat to look at it at the end of the day. I am looking for a mathematical explanation or just a technical description of why the ALL-IN graph is flawed...even if its just inaccurate it should give a rough magnitude of your equity lost to suckout.

yea they're neat

the All-In graph may not be 'flawed' in itself but the fact that poker is much MUCH more than what can be measured by the All-In expectation should be enough to get you off this program for good. You find some 'true LAGs' that break-even more or less at showdown but crush for over 5ptbb/100 - just some food for thought.

hope you get out of the rut soon. I'd send you my luckbox if I could~

The allin luck is definitely 100% accurate. The skalansky could be somewhat suspect. But for the allin luck, assuming average allin is for 1k pot (500 each), you're only 1 standard deviation below expectation (16% chance of this happening or worse every 460 allins). So it's not really that bad at all - it's just the same as aa losing to kk. If you were 2 or 3 standard deviations below then you probably do have something to bitch about

...16% chance of this happening or worse...

Wow.
I really thought this would be somewhere close to 5%.
Maybe I'm still carrying some residual sensitivity from the poor run expectation-wise of last month...

Thanks for that number, btw.