The EV being incorrect myth - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Where is that 1.12.11 gone now? link isn't valid and latest release now seems to be the 1.12.10 from june. I'm installing on new machine...

  2. #12
    *** HM3! *** fozzy71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1971
    Location
    HM Support
    Posts
    31,692

    Default

    The announcement might have got hidden because it was set to expire on the 30th of September. I just extended the announcement expiration to the end of October so it should be visible again, but here is a direct download link also.

    Make sure you install the full HM1 setup first, before you update:

    1.12.10b installer - http://www.holdemmanager.com/downloa...ager_Setup.exe

    1.12.11 10Sept update - http://www.holdemmanager.com/Downloa..._10Sep2012.exe

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    thanks

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Am gonna open this topic up again cause I am constantly being told EV for 18man is completely wrong by just about every 18m grinder out there. No one will say how they even know this , just that it's been a taken for granted fact for eons. How do I calculate things to see if they ring true?

    An exmple here, we've taken just 1 hand and filter is set to allin=true so AIPF EV in other words.







    How do I figure out if this is correct?

    The pot I have 65.2% chance of winning is 5826, how is that cEV difference of 3801 arrived at first of all?

    Secondly, I understand how the bb/100 for this hand is -354.75 because I lost 2838 which devided by bb800 is 3.5475 which 100 times over makes an easy 354.75/100. But how is the ev number 120.34? I SHOULD have won 5826 so that devided by bb800 comes to 728.25 bb/100, so how is the 120.34 arrived at?

    Next there's the actual cEV figure over on the right stating that adjusted EV means I should've won 962.68. How does that work also?!!

    Have a feeling I'm totally not gonna understand the answer so can you pretend you're talking to a 2yr old? Thanks
    Last edited by RunBad4Life; 10-18-2012 at 04:24 PM.

  5. #15
    HM Support Patvs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Posts
    33,523

    Default


    The pot I have 65.2% chance of winning is 5826, how is that cEV difference of 3801 arrived at first of all?

    cEV Diff = what you should* have won - what you actually win.
    *You should have won 65.24% of 5826 chips: 3801 chips. That's your chip equity.
    That's what you mathematicaly should win.

    You ended up losing the hand. So you ended up with 0 chips. 3801 - 0 = an cEV Diff of +3801.
    If you had WON the hand. The hand would have resulted in 3801 - 5826 = a cEV Diff of -2025.


    Secondly, I understand how the bb/100 for this hand is -354.75 because I lost 2838 which devided by bb800 is 3.5475 which 100 times over makes an easy 354.75/100. But how is the ev number 120.34? I SHOULD have won 5826 so that devided by bb800 comes to 728.25 bb/100, so how is the 120.34 arrived at?
    You should have won 3801 chips. (3801 / 800 * 100 = 475) The "120" is the Diff between 475 and 355.
    475 + -355.



    Next there's the actual cEV figure over on the right stating that adjusted EV means I should've won 962.68. How does that work also?!!

    962 = -2838 (chips you lose) +3801 (chips you should have won).

    Back to the "120". 120 is (962 / 800) * 100.
    Participate in the Beta release of the newest Hold'em Manager version: HM Cloud. Sign-up HERE.

    If you would like to leave some feedback to help us improve the quality of the solutions, and/or the support quality you received, - you can do this here

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Thanks for that. So it sounds correct then so why does everyone insist it's not? Or is it that when a whole bunch of hands is equated that things start going wrong?

  7. #17
    HM Support Patvs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Posts
    33,523

    Default

    There is no Luck Adjusted Winnings in 18man SNGs. (which only works for STTs)

    Chip EV works fine, but it's not very usefull. (because it doesn't take the blind levels into account in the overall report, so winning an early coinflip will not compensate for losing a lot more chips in a coinflip late in the game)





    So a plausible criticism would be
    Participate in the Beta release of the newest Hold'em Manager version: HM Cloud. Sign-up HERE.

    If you would like to leave some feedback to help us improve the quality of the solutions, and/or the support quality you received, - you can do this here

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    Did you not finish a sentence there?

    YEs I know $ev doesn't work for 18's and chip ev is going to be skewed but you can just filter that to blind level anyway if desired. But is the bb/100 and EVbb/100 still correct? If I start a session and after half hour in and 30 AIPF's I am 400 bb/100 below EV it's correct yes?

  9. #19
    HM Support Patvs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Posts
    33,523

    Default

    Yes the bb/100 and EV bb/100 for chip EV is accurate.

    Though... a plausible criticism would be... there are many hands where All-In EV in itself just doesn't make any sense.
    If you encounter such a hand or situation it can completely screw up the results. Read: http://forums.holdemmanager.com/mana...ituations.html
    Participate in the Beta release of the newest Hold'em Manager version: HM Cloud. Sign-up HERE.

    If you would like to leave some feedback to help us improve the quality of the solutions, and/or the support quality you received, - you can do this here

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    372

    Default

    So here we are once again. Here is a 5 century (feels like it) long graph. Can you confirm this is in no way faulty or inaccurate? I don't think it is faulty, as I know for a fact I run like death 365 days of every single year, but it just seems too insane. I also know of no one person who can produce anything similar, which kinda confirms it isn't faulty also. It covers 25,000 tournaments worth of all-in pre flop hands.

    89bbb7a5bcf135844db930283807818a.png

Similar Threads

  1. Incorrect EV
    By Stanny6 in forum Manager General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-12-2011, 05:06 AM
  2. 18 Man SNG EVs Incorrect?
    By john2 in forum Manager General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-28-2010, 06:06 AM
  3. EV incorrect
    By Pica in forum Manager General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-19-2010, 02:07 AM
  4. Dates are incorrect
    By MellowYellow in forum Manager General
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-09-2010, 11:27 PM
  5. incorrect BB/100
    By uneducated in forum Manager General
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-30-2009, 08:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •