Originally Posted by
udbrky
Since it has absolutely nothing to do with an individual site, there is no reason to believe it is wrong on one site. Why do you think it's not right on a specific site?
No, I just wanted to ask if there are any known sites where you would know it is not correct.
Again:
Back in the days there was a site existing, where the AI_EV-calculations have been for a fact not correct due to the fact that the site even has not revealed the holecards (from the player who has lost the pot), even not in AllIN-Situations...
OK, I see your bolded points now. Well, obviously, if you cannot know the opponents' hole cards, then it logically follows, that you cannot know your EV against them. This is why you cannot know in live play, what your odds of winning a hand are. It can't be calculated. This does not mean it is calculated incorrectly. It is ignored.
yeah, agree - ''not claculated correctly'' is here the wrong expression - just the result would be off since many situations would be ignored...
As I said, it's calculated at the point where you get all in - and all running it twice happens after that point, so it is moot. It cannot change your EV. What it can change is the amount you actually win.
For example, you run it twice and win the one pot and lose the other, so you chop it, and only win half of what you would have won. Or you don't lose what you would have lost.
Thus, your EV difference will be different - the amount above/below what you would have won EV-wise.
But it still does nothing to change what you would have won, had you run at EV.
thanks for explantation
I'm not sure what you mean as a better indicator. I'm not following the posts at all, as to what the point is.
then please show this point to a co-worker from you, since I am sure that most ppl will get what I mean - actually it is not complicated.
Just that lets say you play 500k hands and HM2 shows follwing:
a.) bb/100 = +3bb
b.) evbb/100 = + 5bb
even though AIEV is only a smaller part of the overall variance, you should after a medium large sample like 500000 hands, assume (if forced to make a guess) that your true winrate should be within this 500k-sample closer to 5bb/100 (b) than to 3bb/100 (a)
The usefulness of EV stats are highly debated. It only shows what you would have won, if you had run as you had.
It tells you nothing as to how you played the hand. For example, you get it in as a 50% favorite and lose the hand, you were getting 4:1 in the pot, so you only needed 20% equity to make that a breakeven call. You win, and you run .5P above EV - so you sucked out. Did you play it badly?
Look, by all respect - you are talking to me very basic stuff which everyone is aware of - thanks for trying, but it does not help.
Again:
Yes, everybody knows that AI_EV is only a small part of game and often does not answer the question how you played, and hence is a poor indicator of your true winrate.
But also everyone knows and it is pretty clear, that after decent large samples, if youre forced to make a guess on your actual winrate, you better look at the evbb/100 than the bb/100...
Isn't this kinda pretty obvious?
It ignores whether you should have been in the hand up to that point, or if at all, if you should have raised or bet or called, or even folded. It ignores the ranges of a player.
And EV does not pay the rent.
EVbb/100 really a better indicator than bb/100 for ''true" winrate - check this out
Reply With Quote
