Misclick leads to tough descison.....

[Garth Kay]

The point is, getting back to the original discussion, calling off $100 just because you misclicked and would never have been in a hand to begin with, is throwing bad money after bad money....

Is illogical - because you might not win the hand as often as lose, but you will win more $$$'s over a greater data sample than you will lose.

Just because the odds are 50/50, does not GAURANTEE that you will get an exactly even outcome....

Over an infinite data sample you will, which dictates whether the play or return is +EV, -EV or neutral EV. You cannot take a small sample in isolation to justify anything in regards to statistics, all permutations and an infinite data sample must be applied.

You are 1/3-2/3 against, EVERY time you try. So you cannot say after 1000 tries you will win 333 times!! That just does not happen, and therefore, your formula for generating that data is flawed.....

Over an infinite data sample (or large enough sample that variance is negligible) you will see that you win exactly 33% of the time to make this profitable. It might not happen every time but the formula for generating the data is not flawed and is acceptable.

you are a 66% dog.

you will win 1 out of every 3 times..

Basically, it comes down to the fact that you know you are behind, and are gambling. You might as well put your $100 on a line or a 3rd on Roulette... It is the same thing.....

Flawed, the two lines are one in the same when talking probabilities. The only problem is you view this as we only we run the trial three times (and therefore VARIANCE has a huge impact on the end result.

Gambling on roulette or craps is slightly different as there a multitude of variables to take into consideration, no matter if the calculations, permutations and variables are all considered over an infinite data sample the same play will always result in the house winning, the edge is always to the house in these table games. ANy casino game is always -EV.

What are the odds of hitting something 1/3 of the time when you only have 1/3 a chance of hitting it each time....

Now this is where you are starting to use variance to support your argument. The above statement is illogical in scientific terms based on what we are discussing right now. If there is a 1 in 3 chance of hitting it, then over an infinite data sample it will be hit 1/3 times.

[JMACK007]

"The physics and math behind this discovery are complex. To understand more about flips, the academics built a coin-tossing machine and filmed it using a slow-motion camera. This confirmed that the outcome of flips is not random. The machine could produce heads every time. "

I WANT ONE OF THOSE MACHINES!!!

[JMACK007]

Garth, to me it is illogical to project a profit based on 1000 hands using data generated using "infinite" hands. They are not the same thing..

[rcon]

Garth, to me it is illogical to project a profit based on 1000 hands using data generated using "infinite" hands. They are not the same thing..

then you should never call with a naked flush draw. simple really

[JMACK007]

I'm still gonna call with it, but I'm not going to predict an exact profit with it over 1000 hands....

[rcon]

I'm still gonna call with it, but I'm not going to predict an exact profit with it over 1000 hands....

maybe not exact, but over 1000 hands you sure can get pretty close!

[Des]

My head hurts.

I'm going out drinking!

Drunk facebook is on tonight.

[bennymacca]

I don't think that was what benny the cunt was saying. He was implying that the chances of a tail coming up after 20 heads in a row improve...

what i am saying is that the ACTUAL outcome of the hand is IRRELEVANT

trishan explained it perfectly, the outcome of the hand is variance.

FWIW aaron's post about the doors might have confused you, it really has nothing to do with it here.

i dont think we can explain it any better.

[JMACK007]

Can I just say (and this will be my last post, I promise), that I get where you guys are coming from, and have done so all along, I just don't agree with it. So comments like "anyone who has passed 5th grade can get it" or "thanks for trying to get your head around this" or "give it time, you will get there" or "you are totally illogical", are not needed.

I guess I have a different way of looking at things and situations than you guys, sorry! It would be a boring world if we were all the same!

So good luck all, enjoy your time at the tables and you future discussions on the forum.

Cheers,

Jo

[trishan]

Can I just say (and this will be my last post, I promise), that I get where you guys are coming from, and have done so all along, I just don't agree with it. So comments like "anyone who has passed 5th grade can get it" or "thanks for trying to get your head around this" or "give it time, you will get there" or "you are totally illogical", are not needed.

I guess I have a different way of looking at things and situations than you guys, sorry! It would be a boring world if we were all the same!

So good luck all, enjoy your time at the tables and you future discussions on the forum.

Cheers,

Jo

Hey Jo,

I don't think any of us are trying to have a go. We are just trying to help. Different views and opinions are respected.

I sort of understand what you are saying. Playing 888PL and smaller stakes the poker thinking is fairly straight forward. "Bet a good hand" is the mantra and so you can in most cases assign pretty tight ranges. When you eventually move up the stakes (as I am sure you will) you will realise that outside of 888PL and microstakes (and even small stakes) the math becomes a lot more important.

It's always good to have different point of views. There is no wrong or right, just some arguments clearly made out have more merit than others. The important thing is, don't let this one instance of differing opinion stop you from contributing in the future.