HSP season 5

blainj2 · 19-03-2009 8:48pm

Sorry to interupt the age old gameshow question argument but anyone know why phil ivey doesnt look to be playing on any of the episodes this year?

Flushdraw · 19-03-2009 9:07pm

blainj2 wrote: »

Sorry to interupt the age old gameshow question argument but anyone know why phil ivey doesnt look to be playing on any of the episodes this year?

Busto

Ste05 · 19-03-2009 9:14pm

Gholi, that was pretty impressive levelling... LOL at Kayroo and ocallagh for falling for it...

Now, can we get back to gossiping about whether Negreanu is on "something" or whether Durrrrr is in every show, or whether Ziiigy will blow up and start playing Poker, or basically anything at all related to HSP.

If people don't understand the Equity not changing by running it twice leave them to it, or start a new thread in Theory explaining it out and we can get into it in depth... this is a fun thread.

Thanking you all forever.

Ste05

P.S. Seriously LMAO at Kayroo and ocallagh, nice work gents...

And some serious kudos to Gholi, my hat is off to you sir.

19-03-2009 9:24pm

You can go fúck off and all:D

Theresalwaysone · 19-03-2009 9:26pm

Gholi I am sorry for ruffling you, but I was sure Keane was gonna get banned and I didnt wanna see kayroo embarass himself any more than he already had.

Mr.Plough · 19-03-2009 9:30pm

Ste05 · 19-03-2009 9:32pm

Theresalwaysone wrote: »

Gholi I am sorry for ruffling you, but I was sure Keane was gonna get banned and I didnt wanna see kayroo embarass himself any more than he already had.

meh, he edited it within a half hour and it wasn't all that bad anyway.

Theresalwaysone · 19-03-2009 9:35pm

Ste05 wrote: »

meh, he edited it within a half hour and it wasn't all that bad anyway.

yeah I know, I wasnt saying he should have got banned. I thought it was entirely appropriate considering he didnt know Gholi wasnt being serious.

Just you dont know what mood you'll catch any of you mods in. Crazy bastids.

KevinK · 19-03-2009 9:40pm

blainj2 wrote: »

Sorry to interupt the age old gameshow question argument but anyone know why phil ivey doesnt look to be playing on any of the episodes this year?

According to this it sounds like he just didn't show.

http://podcast.wjfk.com/wjfk2/1602256.mp3

or
http://mediocrepokerradio.com/podcasts/

Interview with Mori Eskandani (22/02/09

Tight Ted · 19-03-2009 10:02pm

Running it twice with an overpair PF is good because if you get sucked out on once by your opponent hitting you're much less likely to get sucked out on again (because there will be only 1 more card in the the deck that will give him a set). So you're more or less guaranteed your money back no matter what happens.

What day of the week does this show air?

Tight Ted · 19-03-2009 10:14pm

I just glanced over the whole game show quiz debate you were having. The reason you switch doors is because at first guess you have a 33% chance of being right and a 66% chance of being wrong.

The host knows which door has the prize behind it and thus opens the door which you did not pick which does not have the prize behind it.

So by switching doors when given the opportunity, you're affectively picking two doors and increasing your odds of being right from 33% to 66%.

I don't know what on earth this has to do with running it twice though.

KevinK · 19-03-2009 10:55pm

Tight Ted wrote: »

What day of the week does this show air?

Sunday night, 9pm East Coast time I think, it is usually up on Pokertube by Monday morning

Daithio · 19-03-2009 11:03pm

Tight Ted wrote: »

Running it twice with an overpair PF is good because if you get sucked out on once by your opponent hitting you're much less likely to get sucked out on again (because there will be only 1 more card in the the deck that will give him a set). So you're more or less guaranteed your money back no matter what happens.

What day of the week does this show air?

Depends on your risk preference, but if you're risk averse this makes sense.

Daithio · 19-03-2009 11:10pm

As regards the Monty Hall problem, the reason it's profitable to switch is because the host knows when he picks one of the two remaining doors that he has to pick one with a goat behind it. This effects the outcome.

When you pick your original door, there is a 1/3 chance that the car is behind it. So, moving to the host's decision, it follows that 1/3 of the time both of the remaining doors will have a goat, and 2/3 of the time one will have a car and one a goat. So 2/3 of the time, the host is forced into opening a particular door, leaving the last door with a car in it 2/3 of the time. And hence, 2/3 of the time, your switching will result in you winning a car, as opposed to the 1/3 chance from picking the original door.

/End derailment.

Hectorjelly · 21-03-2009 6:39am

If you think there is a even a small chance your EV changes depending on how many iterations of an event there are you should never play poker or be allowed to operate heavy machinery

opr · 23-03-2009 3:35am

New Eppy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R09x7R9yXds

Opr

LuckyLloyd · 23-03-2009 4:17am

This post has been deleted.

NickyOD · 23-03-2009 4:35am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

"Math is idiotic"

Yeah Greenstein goes down to the bottom of the pile in my estimation after this series. Never liked his book anyway.

LuckyLloyd · 23-03-2009 4:36am

This post has been deleted.

Hectorjelly · 23-03-2009 4:45am

Good episode. I love how durr has tilted most of the table.

NickyOD · 23-03-2009 5:06am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Oh, watch on. It was another loldonkamentsesque drive for charity.

I still can't respect someone who sticks in $270,000 knowing it's a bad move just because he might get the opportunity to use the catchphrase for some muppets on a poker forum.

kennyrsb · 23-03-2009 5:16am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

"Math is idiotic"

i think it was for charity too, it came from something barrys step son, joe sebok, said on a radio show but when joe said it it wasent in jest and he got alot of stick for it so i think its also a little needle at joe too.

kennyrsb · 23-03-2009 5:30am

ok sorry just watched the episode and i can see it explains all that......

Hectorjelly · 23-03-2009 5:33am

NickyOD wrote: »

I still can't respect someone who sticks in $270,000 knowing it's a bad move just because he might get the opportunity to use the catchphrase for some muppets on a poker forum.

He didn't

BuChan · 23-03-2009 6:49am

that was fun. i assume that barry though he had some fold equity against an overpair and wasn't just doing the old "i put you on AK". it is impressive how bad dwan has thrown everyone off their game. eastgate's Q7 fold was good, considering the weak value-bet i think it would have been easy to level yourself into a call there.

Hectorjelly · 23-03-2009 6:56am

I dont think so, I think its clear Barry was really frustrated and made a very bad call pre, once he hits top pair he has to go with it having put so much of his stack in. He didnt have anywhere near enough money to get Durr of anything

BuChan · 23-03-2009 7:12am

yeah i guess your right. incredible really that he can **** with his head that bad. i really wish that the show was longer and showed a few more standard type hands. surely people are 3betting durrr more often than we're seeing. barry posted on 2+2 that often they don't show a lot of pots that are cbet or 3bet, c-bet and won.

Gholimoli · 23-03-2009 10:42am

will some one be kind enough to put the latest episod in this thread as i cant access youtube or pokertube in work.
thanks.

tylerdurden94 · 23-03-2009 11:21am

Is it just me or is Zigmund all over the place?

RedJoker · 23-03-2009 12:47pm

Just to simplify the running it twice problem. Say we have 10 cards, 2 are good, 8 are bad and we have to pick one card. So we're in an 80/20 situation.

Take a $200 pot. If we run it once our EV is 20% x $200 = $40.

Now let's run it twice.

On the first run a good card will come up 20% of the time. When it does the equity will change on the second run. There is now 1 good card and 8 bad, so we have 11.11% equity on the second run.

So 20% of the time we'll win $100 and have an 11.11% shot at the second $100:

20%[$100 + (11.11% x $100)] = $22.22

If a bad card comes up on the first run, which will happen 80% of the time, our equity on the second run changes. There's 2 good cards and 7 bad, so we have 22.22% equity on the second run.

So 80% of the time we win nothing and have a 22.22% shot at the second $100:

80%[$0 + (22.22% x $100)] = $17.78

When we sum these two expectations we get:

20%[$100 + (11.11% x $100)] + 80%[$0 + (22.22% x $100)]

= $22.22 + $17.78

= $40

Which is the exact same EV as running it once.

So, even though our equity changes on the second run, the probability of those changes balance each other.

What it does do is change the variance.

When running it once there's a 20% probability of being +$200 and an 80% of having $0:

V = p1(x1 - E(x))^2 + p2(x2 - E(x))^2

V = 20%($200 - $40)^2 + 80%($0 - $40)^2

V = 5120 + 1280

V = $6,400

When running it twice there's a (0.2 x 0.111) = 2.22% chance of being up $200. There's (0.2 x 0.889) + (0.8 x 0.222) = 0.1778 + 0.1776 = 35.54% chance of being up $100. And a (0.8 x 0.778) = 62.24% chance of having $0.

V = p1(x1 - E(x))^2 + p2(x2 - E(x))^2 + p3(x3 - E(x))^2

V = 2.22%($200 - $40)^2 + 35.54%($100 - $40)^2 + 62.24%($0 - $40)^2

V = 568.32 + 1279.44 + 995.84

V = $2843.6

So it more than halves the variance by running it twice.

HSP season 5

Comments