My Journey As A Professional Poker Player (21 Viewers)

Anthony Martino said:
Running it twice is beneficial if you are the equity favorite, which I typically am

But I'm not paying double rake for it
Click to expand...
Running it twice isn't favorable for anyone. It's completely EV-neutral, whether you run it 2 times or 20 times.

I did the math on this ages ago, and running it x times is essentially getting you closer and closer to the perfect mathematical equity, the higher x goes. You're running x outcomes out of y total possible outcomes, where the result of running all y outcomes would be a precise equity split.

Think about how, say, the Pro Poker Tools simulator works. It's essentially running x either all the way to y, or up to 600,000 if y is too large. The result is your equity, approximated statistically instead of calculated theoretically.

Without digging too deeply into the algebra, think about it in terms of solely running the river in Hold'em multiple times, since the math there is much simpler. Suppose your opponent has 8 outs from the remaining 44 cards in the deck. The 36 other cards give you the win. You're 36/44 = ~81.8% and he's 8/44 = ~18.2%, in theoretical equity.

Skipping burn cards for this exercise (which are irrelevant to equity calculations), what happens if you run it the maximum number of times, the full remaining 44 in the stub? The pot gets split into 44 parts, and he gets 8 and you get 36. Zero effect on that hand's EV.

Paying even one more cent of rake for this would be a waste of money, unless you're up against risk of ruin or something.
 
Last edited:
Anthony Martino said:
Not yet. He was the side pot I won when I flopped nuts and rivered boat, so busted him but he rebought
Click to expand...
3047D8F3-32EA-4849-A145-02223A7C0654.png

Hahaha so that was you!!!
 
Jimulacrum said:
Running it twice isn't favorable for anyone. It's completely EV-neutral, whether you run it 2 times or 20 times.

I did the math on this ages ago, and running it x times is essentially getting you closer and closer to the perfect mathematical equity, the higher x goes. You're running x outcomes out of y total possible outcomes, where the result of running all y outcomes would be a precise equity split.

Think about how, say, the Pro Poker Tools simulator works. It's essentially running x either all the way to y, or up to 600,000 if y is too large. The result is a your equity, approximated statistically instead of calculated theoretically.

Without digging too deeply into the algebra, think about it in terms of solely running the river in Hold'em multiple times, since the math there is much simpler. Suppose your opponent has 8 outs from the remaining 44 cards in the deck. The 36 other cards give you the win. You're 36/44 = ~81.8% and he's 8/44 = ~18.2%, in theoretical equity.

Skipping burn cards for this exercise (which are irrelevant to equity calculations), what happens if you run it the maximum number of times, the full remaining 44 in the stub? The pot gets split into 44 parts, and he gets 8 and you get 36. Zero effect on that hand's EV.

Paying even one more cent of rake for this would be a waste of money, unless you're up against risk of ruin or something.
Click to expand...

Running it twice as an equity favorite is the better option because it's harder for your opponent to win both boards

When you are behind, your best shot to scoop is running it once, since you are unlikely to win both boards
 
moechar said:
Haha I'm pretty sure he's multi tabling on some apps that's why. He said he's waiting for 2/5/10 earlier
Click to expand...

He just left the table, asked if he was going to 2/5 but he said he is just taking a break

Two tables of 2/5 running, two names on list, 1 was called but can't read from here
 
Anthony Martino said:
Running it twice as an equity favorite is the better option because it's harder for your opponent to win both boards

When you are behind, your best shot to scoop is running it once, since you are unlikely to win both boards
Click to expand...
What you're saying is true. However, the way you're looking at it is missing important nuance. Specifically, your opponent's chance to scoop is also increased by running it only once, whether he's ahead or behind. And your probability of winning it all is less than if you'd only run it once, but taking the average of all your splits, scoops, and losses, it comes out to the exact same equity.

The only real drawback to running it multiple times is an issue of game health, because it cuts back on variance. For example, if you run it all 44 times in my example above, variance drops to 0, and Villain is always taking the same loss. Obviously you never run it 44 times, but as I said before, the closer you get to that 44, the closer you get to that perfect equity split. The more often you run it multiple times, the fewer opportunities weaker players have to get lucky when they're behind, which will ultimately drive them from the game.
 
Jimulacrum said:
What you're saying is true. However, the way you're looking at it is missing important nuance. Specifically, your opponent's chance to scoop is also increased by running it only once, whether he's ahead or behind. And your probability of winning it all is less than if you'd only run it once, but taking the average of all your splits, scoops, and losses, it comes out to the exact same equity.

The only real drawback to running it twice is an issue of game health, because running it multiple times cuts back on variance. For example, if you run it all 44 times in my example above, variance drops to 0, and Villain is always taking the same loss. Obviously you never run it 44 times, but as I said before, the closer you get to that 44, the closer you get to that perfect equity split. The more often you run it multiple times, the fewer opportunities weaker players have to get lucky when they're behind, which will ultimately drive them from the game.
Click to expand...

200.gif
 
Jimulacrum said:
I wish I could show you the calculations I did on this years ago. Imagine a whole sheet of notebook paper covered in algebraic fractions.

Thankfully, many other geeks have also done these calculations and come to the same conclusion, so I don't need to redo the work.
Click to expand...

tenor.gif
 
Anthony Martino said:
View attachment 629795
Click to expand...
Way less entertaining than that.

And actually, I just remembered one more drawback to running it twice: it results in fewer rebuys and tends to keep average stacks shorter than running it once. This often doesn't matter much, but it can have a significant effect in certain structures (e.g., a NLHE game with a very short max buy-in).
 
Flopped a straight flush with 1 minute left on the $1,000 high hand at Tampa Hard Rock

It was 15 seconds after the high hand switched to $500 when my hand was tabled

So even though my high hand was dealt before the period was over, they only count it when you table it

So now instead of winning 1k, I have to hope my T-high straight flush holds another 30 minutes to win 500
 
Anthony Martino said:
Elizabeth blalock blocked me on facebook cause I didnt softplay it, she had ace high flush, fuck her, not softplaying anyone
Click to expand...
If that's the kind of person she is, better off that way. Softplay is collusion.
Coyote said:
DO NOT have a facebook account, whatever you bread-winning method / profession may be.
Click to expand...
Why?
 
Coyote said:
Wide-spread malice, mental illness and unfair antagonism.
"Whatever you declare will be used against you" (by virtually any-fuckin'-body).
You still have the right to remain silent :)
Click to expand...
That's fair. I'm currently on 30-day time-out from FB for speaking too bluntly about a shitty person, and this time away from it is inspiring me to consider an even longer hiatus. The site has its upsides, but the downsides are many.
 
Indeed.
By the way, now you had your kindergarten teacher spanking you in your adult life. :D

I realised first-hand the evils of true Democracy (in the ancient Greek sense, practically meaning Populace Rule) when I started posting in either political fora or in off-topic Politics sections of various hobbies' fora.
Never before the internet era had so many clueless and illiterate people written so much.

Plato and Aristotelis were right in denouncing Democracy, as the springboard of Tyranny (because the populace are dumb and Tyranny-minded).
The only ancient Greek author to defend democracy has been the (very conservative otherwise) Thucidides, putting in Pericles' mouth the famous Funeral Speech, about the first Athenian casualties in the war against Spartan militaristic oligarchy.
But it was the charismatic and wise Pericles, a man who could have been King or Tyrant in many other Greek City States.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

ItterBe
My PCF Journey
Replies
6
Views
195
Fran
Fran
princeink
This is going to be a problem
Replies
15
Views
405
potatolei
potatolei
M
Thoughts on Paulson Chips as a newbie...
Replies
1
Views
205
allforcharity
allforcharity
G
New Member
Replies
15
Views
288
potatolei
potatolei
ngmcs8203
  • Poll
What would you do? Bad poker player, can see his cards?
Replies
19
Views
744
ovo
ovo
Back
Top Bottom