yes, but I don't believe you can accurately calculate EV in poker gamesOriginally Posted by coach belly
you can't know if a player who you are facing has improved or gotten worse due to aging or illness or something else - you can only know the past history which may not be predictive
and when there are hundreds or thousands of players as in the WSOP main event -
forget about it - totally impossible
.
the foolish sayings of a rich man often pass for words of wisdom by the fools around him
Do you know that the WSOP Main Event is highly +EV for most pros?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Expected value is really a function of math, usually against a constant set of rules and conditions and fairly easy to figure out based on the math.
Poker and sports betting are a little different. For starters, you aren't playing against the house and a specific set of rules like other casino games, but rather against other players with the house or casino taking a commission. There probably is away to come up with an exact expected value in these situation, but it is much more complex, and involves some guess work or estimating. And that is why I have always steered clear. I like a good hard number involving EV that really puts the "expectation" in EV.
Now in the last year, since last September, I have been involved in some sports betting that is +EV. But the EV comes from a specific thing or situation, the bonuses offered. So we are right back to that constant set of circumstances and formula.
Anyway, the cleaning lady is done doing her thing, so I am going to head out and collect some EV from some free play previously earned before it gets too hot.
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
By the way, speaking of weather, I am going to quickly post this little tidbit right here in the Todd WSOP thread, since the jist of this thread is finished, rather than start a new thread just for this one post.
Last evening it rained here in Vegas for a short time. They had said possibility of thunderstorms in the evening. I didn't hear any thunder or see any lightning though. I haven't paid enough attention to know if this is the start of monsoon season, in which we have more humid weather than usual, coming up from Arizona and Mexico for a month or so, that often results in a short period of heavy rain.
But here is what was unusual about last evening's rain. There was a little wind blowing and it was hot. Yesterday was only about 110 or 111, but the wind blowing made the air feel much hotter. Think of a fan in the oven blowing the really hot air on you.And the weirdest pat: The rain was hot. It was like someone splashing water from a hot tub on you. Just weird.
Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".
that is probably trueOriginally Posted by coach bellyDo you know that the WSOP Main Event is highly +EV for most pros?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
they may be able to predict that it's positive - but they could not tell you by how much
they could only make a very raw and rough guesstimate - anything greater than that would be impossible
in blackjack, when an AP knows the rules and the deck penetration he can come close to an exact estimate of the EV
.
the foolish sayings of a rich man often pass for words of wisdom by the fools around him
Is there a mathematical basis for their predictions?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Is a mathematical basis required for the guesstimates to be valid?
If not math, then what criteria could they use?
I don't think this conversation is benefitting anybody so I'll bow out after this last commentOriginally Posted by coach bellyIs there a mathematical basis for their predictions?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Is a mathematical basis required for the guesstimates to be valid?
If not math, then what criteria could they use?
they would use only the rawest, most basic, simple math
he would surmise for example that he is ranked as one of the top 100 players in the world and there are thousands of players there who are not in that category
based on that simplistic math he believes he will come away with a profit - but he could not come remotely close to accurately predicting how much it is likely to be
.
the foolish sayings of a rich man often pass for words of wisdom by the fools around him
Originally Posted by Half Smoke
V, my vp winnings (as in profit) are in the millions of dollars. I've posted about countless $10 machine & up winners and supplied required tax forms to Gaming Today for 8 years. Since then, you little people got to see some of the larger ones hit after I stopped playing professionally. Plus here's a flash: neither of my homes has a basement....and in what fantasy story of yours would you believe Rob Singer--the best vp player ever--would have a white trash vp machine in his home to "practice" on?Originally Posted by MisterVThat's REAL money from REAL casino play, not stacks of prop cash claimed to have been won from a practice VP machine in your basement.Originally Posted by Half Smoke
You should get over the phony "prop cash" thing. Anyone who wants to believe that baloney does so because that's the way they need it to be in order to cope.
Sounds like you!
Wiki? Really??Originally Posted by Half Smokethe link is his Wiki page -Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
quote - "as of 2023 his total live tournament winnings exceed $1,018,000"
and referring to the year 2005 - quote - "Witteles set a World Series Poker record, no other player in history has finished better in the first 2 events - he was also named Card Player's Magazine 2005 World Series Poker Player of the Year"
he most definitely is a long term winner - to believe otherwise you would have to believe he lost all of that back in various cash games - very, very unlikely
he is a person who has definitely proven himself to have a degree of greatness about him
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Witteles
.
The rest of that "Todd resume'" is equally irrelevant. These poker pros who claim millions of dollars won, tournaments and bracelets won, blah blah blah--and then went into the toilet--are a dime a dozen. Why? BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE HOPELESS ADDICTS AND ACTION JUNKIES AND ALSO LOSE ONLINE, LIKE IDIOTS.
Fools here claim "Todd's a winning player because he knows what he's talking about!"
Everybody lies....and the most desperate among them need to.
You people really do need an idol.
really____?Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I didn't know that
does that include you yourself_______?
or are you the very rare exception to the rule___________?
.
the foolish sayings of a rich man often pass for words of wisdom by the fools around him
So you say...but the "debunking" would seem to show "something else" about your claims.Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
It always struck me as odd that you provided no "proof" of your claimed monster VP win; you won't name the casino, e.g. nor provide a copy of the W-2G; c'mon man, give us the W-2G, at least.
Otherwise you're just another of many bullshit artists that haunt gambling forums.
What, Me Worry?
So funny how jealous you become when someone else has some spotlight as a successful gambler. Prime example of how pathetic you are.Originally Posted by Rob.SingerWiki? Really??Originally Posted by Half Smokethe link is his Wiki page -Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
quote - "as of 2023 his total live tournament winnings exceed $1,018,000"
and referring to the year 2005 - quote - "Witteles set a World Series Poker record, no other player in history has finished better in the first 2 events - he was also named Card Player's Magazine 2005 World Series Poker Player of the Year"
he most definitely is a long term winner - to believe otherwise you would have to believe he lost all of that back in various cash games - very, very unlikely
he is a person who has definitely proven himself to have a degree of greatness about him
.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Witteles
.
The rest of that "Todd resume'" is equally irrelevant. These poker pros who claim millions of dollars won, tournaments and bracelets won, blah blah blah--and then went into the toilet--are a dime a dozen. Why? BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE HOPELESS ADDICTS AND ACTION JUNKIES AND ALSO LOSE ONLINE, LIKE IDIOTS.
Fools here claim "Todd's a winning player because he knows what he's talking about!"
Everybody lies....and the most desperate among them need to.
You people really do need an idol.
Don't believe Dan is a winner, who cares.
No one thinks these websites are run as an entrepreneurial endeavor, moron.
The clown has spent his whole life trying to legitimize himself as a gambler . Apparently he used to write some (no doubt worthless) articles in gambling rag. The book.. the countless stories on here. He lashes out at kewl because kewl was more believable.Originally Posted by MisterVSo you say...but the "debunking" would seem to show "something else" about your claims.Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
It always struck me as odd that you provided no "proof" of your claimed monster VP win; you won't name the casino, e.g. nor provide a copy of the W-2G; c'mon man, give us the W-2G, at least.
Otherwise you're just another of many bullshit artists that haunt gambling forums.
He has to put Dan down. It is part of this dork's psychology. He has nothing but stories. Never a picture of his Newell. Never even a picture of this car which isn't particularly expensive anyway. Lol. All his assets hidden .. cuz? Oh yea that's just what one does when they retire, right?
Originally Posted by coach bellyIs there a mathematical basis for their predictions?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Is a mathematical basis required for the guesstimates to be valid?
If not math, then what criteria could they use?
I've read Main Event estimates, going back years, ranging from +200 to roughly +400 for a Chris Ferguson type player (mathematically precise) versus the run-of-the-mill player. That stuff was dated; I have no idea if it is ballpark current. I've never looked closely into it, but I presume all you have to do is plug in ranges of non-optimal but intelligent decisions versus optimal decisions and the effects of those non-optimal decisions, operating on the premise that you can assign percentages of the field various deviations from optimal. I know folks have done the work and run the simulations. But that was years ago, more than a decade.
I have to think it's also a papers/scissors/rock simulation in that the play style of chunks of the poker-playing demography has changed dramatically over the decades, so what is "optimal" depends on the average behaviors of the players at the table, which change like fashion. So what works versus a table heavy with 80's-style players is not what is optimal versus 2020's style players. I don't really follow it much, but Negreanu for example was not a "small pair versus AK" guy 25 years ago, in fact he actually stated that more than once, but now his language is completely different in how he discusses those hands. He is a small pair vs. AK guy now. In fact, some of Negreanu's analyses come at things from what he says are "Old School" and then "New School" perspectives, underlining the dramatic differences.
I'm strictly an amateur. I've played the easiest tournament game (No Limit Hold 'Em) 99% of the time, and I've only played maybe 4000 tournaments in my life. That's nothing. When someone like me sits down against players like Todd, they can spin my head around like The Exorcist. And they can make precise shifts in optimal as number of players and category/profile of players at tables change. I can't do that.
EV for Poker is usually determined based on "Past Results". Most AP games you can determine an exact edge since a value can be placed on each and every action. Poker is different because you have the "human element".Originally Posted by coach bellyIs there a mathematical basis for their predictions?Originally Posted by Half Smoke
Is a mathematical basis required for the guesstimates to be valid?
If not math, then what criteria could they use?
Generally when it comes to EV in Poker, it is determined 2 ways. The first is the players long-term ACTUAL results. If a player has played full time for 15 years, the amount won divided by the amount of entry fees. This amount would be the players long-term EV, (Negative or Positive). The second method of determining EV is by evaluating the strength of the field. There are tournaments that are historically soft due to the field makeup. Others may historically have a strong field of players.
With poker, it's not an exact or precise number. I believe the most accurate method is to calculate a players long-term past results then adjust that number up or down based on the strength of a particular tournament.
Since there is so much data available for the history of tournament results, an index can be created by taking a players long-term "Average Win" (as a percentage), then compare that to how players preform in each specific tournament over a multi year period. This can give you a specific number that says "the average winning player preforms 7% lower than their own long-term results", or vise versa in a specific tournament. There likely already is something like this out there.
Last edited by PositiveVariance; 07-23-2024 at 05:19 PM.
Also, there are many players that are "slightly" better than the field, but will be -EV when it comes to actual profit. This is due to the rake. Last I looked, the Main Even took $900 on the $10k. So a player must overcome 9% before they are truly +EV. Rake can get absurd when it comes to low limit cash games. It is common in $1/2 games to have no one "up" because the casino is "taking out" $200-$300 (or more) per hour in rake.
Last edited by PositiveVariance; 07-23-2024 at 05:42 PM.
Regarding individual players' long-term EV, have most pros cashed for more money in main event, than the total of their entry fees?Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Is the WSOP Main Event highly +EV for most pros because the cumulative win for all pros, minus the cumulative entry fees for all pros, is positive?
Nothing against poker players, I believe as a whole, they have the least respect and understanding for variance. This is why you see so many pros go broke. In other forms of AP, Pros have Variance at the top of their list. Most know their exact ROR (Risk if Ruin). If you bring up ROR to most pro poker players, they have no idea what you are talking about.
It's so common to see Poker players on their last $10k (or whatever amount it may be) and playing in a high limit game. At that point, they are literally playing with a 50% ROR. The correct thing to do is to drop down in stakes. I think for most Pros, they would rather play a 50% ROR vs. having to drop down in stakes. To them, this would be humiliation.
There are so Many poker pros that play well beyond an acceptable ROR because others do it, but primarily they don't understand how bad the swings can get when the majority of hands are "coin flips".
[I]Have more Pros cashed for more money in main event, than their entry fees?[/U]Originally Posted by coach bellyRegarding individual players' long-term EV, have most pros cashed for more money in main event, than the total of their entry fees?Originally Posted by PositiveVariance
Is the WSOP Main Event highly +EV for most pros because the cumulative win for all pros, minus the cumulative entry fees for all pros, is positive?
Answer: No. Primarily because the payouts at the very top are so large. Same theory as when the Mega Millions has reached +EV state numerous times in the past decades. A few people willing the bulk of the money.
Is the WSOP Main Event highly +EV for most pros because the cumulative win for all pros, minus the cumulative entry fees for all pros, is positive?
Answer: Correct.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote