Randomness thread, part two.

[CoccoBill]

They're stale? I'd say they're supposed to rather be tart. Try golden raspberries, they're not.

[oskar]

Politics aside,

How come raspberries taste so bitter?

There is a genetic component to how people interpret bitterness. So good news is: the raspberries are probably fine. Bad news: your genes be a stupid.

[oskar]

I don't get esoteric about instruments. Some people like played-in instruments because they believe it gives them some sort of vibe that makes them sound better. I don't really care about any of that, but I do imagine that a guitar that was used to bludgeon a man to death would sound a little better somehow.
I was never able to acquire a piece like that, but I did purchase a guitar from a stage 4 cancer patient today, and it's pretty damn good!

[Poopadoop]

There is a genetic component to how people interpret bitterness. So good news is: the raspberries are probably fine. Bad news: your genes be a stupid.

Also makes a big difference if you eat the fruit and not the leaves. Hint: the red part is the fruit, the green (bitter) part is the leaves. ahahahahaha.

My theory is there is a genetic component to tasting sour too. Every person I've met from the middle east can eat things like lemons or limes like they were an orange, and not be bothered. My mouth turns inside out if I try that, my eyes water. It's like 'how the fuck can you eat that by itself?' I can drink mabye 2 tablespoons of lemon juice if it's in a cup of water. Otherwise no way.

[Poopadoop]

Also if your hypersensitive to bitter, does that mean you don't like chocolate or coffee? That would suck.

[Poopadoop]

I did purchase a guitar from a stage 4 cancer patient today, and it's pretty damn good!

Do you think the cancer got into the wood and made it sound better?

[oskar]

I'm not a doctor, but I guess it's possible.

Also if your hypersensitive to bitter, does that mean you don't like chocolate or coffee? That would suck.

https://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/basics/ptc/

[Jack Sawyer]

Only B12, D3, Calcium/Magnesium/Zinc, Folic acid

Oh, and also some salt in my drinking water


All excess sugars got cut out LDO

For anyone interested, skip the calcium.

Calcium should only come from diet, not supplemented.

[Savy]

For anyone interested, skip the calcium.

Calcium should only come from diet, not supplemented.

Why?

My theory is there is a genetic component to tasting sour too. Every person I've met from the middle east can eat things like lemons or limes like they were an orange, and not be bothered. My mouth turns inside out if I try that, my eyes water. It's like 'how the fuck can you eat that by itself?' I can drink mabye 2 tablespoons of lemon juice if it's in a cup of water. Otherwise no way.

Or it could just be that in those places and cultures they eat a lot more sour things. I know the middle east has a lot of very sour sweets for example. In the same way that things like spice work.

[Jack Sawyer]

The actual list of supplements, according to my research, which would be beneficial looks like this:

Vitamin D3
*Magnesium Citrate (for constipation too) 200mg
*Magnesium Glycinate (for insomnia)
Omega 3 (2 to 3 grams a day, fish source)
Coenzyme Q10
Zinc (25 to 50mg)
B-complex (It has to have at least 1000mcg B12 total)
Vitamin K2 MK4 (200mcg)

* Be a little wary of magnesium as it may cause dependency

[Jack Sawyer]

Why?

Glad you asked

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/faq-20058352

So, why should you get it from foods instead?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart...the-connection

TL;DR heart attacks yo

[Savy]

Glad you asked

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/faq-20058352

So, why should you get it from foods instead?

https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart...the-connection

TL;DR heart attacks yo

There's no good evidence that taking calcium supplements can harm your heart.

As a reasonably young and healthy man you don't need to worry about all this stupid fringe shit. It's a complete waste of your time. As with basically anything food > pills.

I take (haven't for a about a month now) an omega 3, general vitamin tablet and magnesium citrate. I'll probably finish off my supply and then rethink why I'm doing it as it's probably not worth it. Vitamin D is one I should maybe look into.

[Poopadoop]

Why?

In b4 Jack's bones turn to dust.

Something to do with how the body processes it. It can't use Ca supplements properly.

Or it could just be that in those places and cultures they eat a lot more sour things. I know the middle east has a lot of very sour sweets for example. In the same way that things like spice work.

What do you think came first, lack of sensitivity to sour, or the idea to have lots of sour treats?

[Poopadoop]

The actual list of supplements, according to my research, which would be beneficial looks like this:

Vitamin D3
*Magnesium Citrate (for constipation too) 200mg
*Magnesium Glycinate (for insomnia)
Omega 3 (2 to 3 grams a day, fish source)
Coenzyme Q10
Zinc (25 to 50mg)
B-complex (It has to have at least 1000mcg B12 total)
Vitamin K2 MK4 (200mcg)

* Be a little wary of magnesium as it may cause dependency

Is that for everyone or just people who get 70% of their calories from fats?

[Poopadoop]

Glad you asked

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-...s/faq-20058352

Funny that you believe this, but not the research linking fat to heart disease.

[Savy]

What do you think came first, lack of sensitivity to sour, or the idea to have lots of sour treats?

The need to eat food that is native to the places they live?

Look at different generations in the UK as an example. Go back 100 years and the thought of eating something like garlic is a step too far for most maybe the French have a specific gene that makes them like garlic. Spicy food 50 years ago, not eating that shit blows my head off, becomes a common thing in the UK and everyone eats it and their spice tolerance goes up, especially in kids that are used to it.

I'm sure there will be something that does affect how sour/spicy or whatever you find certain foods but the vast overriding criteria will be exposure to certain foods and tastes from a young age.

[Poopadoop]

The need to eat food that is native to the places they live?

Could be. But sour tastes bad for a reason. So maybe the sour foods native to where they live weren't bad for you like the sour foods in (say) Europe. I dunno.

[Poopadoop]

Cats have no taste buds to detect sweet. Fact.

[Poopadoop]

I'm sure there will be something that does affect how sour/spicy or whatever you find certain foods but the vast overriding criteria will be exposure to certain foods and tastes from a young age.

There's genes that control how responsive people are to different tastes. It's not about where you grow up. Maybe if your parents make you eat lemons all day your taste buds will lose their sensitivity by the evening, but if you stop for a day they'll taste just as sour as at the start of the previous day.

[Jack Sawyer]

Is that for everyone or just people who get 70% of their calories from fats?

Generally sound advice for all men

[Jack Sawyer]

Funny that you believe this, but not the research linking fat to heart disease.

Is the food pyramid gospel to you? Shouldn't it be more important how you feel?

I mean, if your diet sucks, the results will manifest quite clearly on their own don't they? You don't need people to tell you that it sucks or doesn't, right?

[Poopadoop]

Is the food pyramid gospel to you? Shouldn't it be more important how you feel?

Let's say I went full Wuf and ate only beef and salt. In three months I lose 10 kg. I'm sick of beef and starting to feel attracted to cows, but I feel better. Does this mean beef is a wonder food, and I can live on it forever?

Or is it more likely I feel better because a) I lost 10 kg of lard around my waist; and b) I stopped eating the non-beef stuff that was making me fat and sick. Hmm?

Let's imagine we take the experiment further: For ten years I eat nothing but beef, and I'm nice and slim. How do you think I compare overall health-wise to those mindless sheep who followed the advice of professional nutritionists and ate lots of fruit and veg?

[Savy]

I lack thoughts so I may have already said this but as much as I like steak and if my choice was a plate of steak or a plate of veg I'd pick the steak but I'd pick steak and veg over either on their own.

Today I couldn't be arsed cooking so cook myself a nice rare steak with some wilted spinach and runner beans. Lovely.

If you are losing a lot of weight quickly and you aren't really overweight I'd be pretty worried especially after a major change in what you are eating. That definitely isn't healthy.

[Poopadoop]

I lack thoughts so I may have already said this but as much as I like steak and if my choice was a plate of steak or a plate of veg I'd pick the steak but I'd pick steak and veg over either on their own.

What cut did you use? I find every steak I eat here tastes not so good.

If you are losing a lot of weight quickly and you aren't really overweight I'd be pretty worried especially after a major change in what you are eating. That definitely isn't healthy.

Jack is doing the keto diet. Wuf is going full caveman where the cavemen lived on an island with only cows and salt to eat. I don't think either one is losing weight too fast. Though haven't heard from Wuf lately, so he may already be dead lol.

[Savy]

Though haven't heard from Wuf lately, so he may already be dead lol.

I like wuf but I'm glad he's posting less as I imagine it means he's filling his time with better shit. It sounded like he was going the right way after finishing uni which is good.

What cut did you use? I find every steak I eat here tastes not so good.

Why would steak here be any different to anywhere else? I'd highly suggest a trip to your local butcher if you find supermarkets to be lacking.

I'm not sure, I tend to buy what looks good and isn't expensive in the supermarket. I think it was probably rump steak from tesco as it was pretty lean which means the steak selection when I went wasn't great as it isn't my go to. Salt, pepper, sprinkle of garlic powder and rub in with a light amount of oil on a high heat and it's never bad, make sure it isn't cold when you fry it and leave it to rest after cooking etc. I also like to leave steak to nearer it's expiry date (usually a couple of days after the date on the pack) as I find it gets more flavourful.

I start my first teaching job in January so I'll probably make some trips to the butcher for some cheap cuts of meat to wack in the slowcooker for stews etc.

[Poopadoop]

Why would steak here be any different to anywhere else? I'd highly suggest a trip to your local butcher if you find supermarkets to be lacking.

Largely depends on what they're fed. Cows that eat grass taste better than cows that are fed corn or soy or other stuff that isn't grain.

But I just read UK cows are grass-fed. So I don't know why they don't taste better.

I'm not sure, I tend to buy what looks good and isn't expensive in the supermarket. I think it was probably rump steak from tesco as it was pretty lean which means the steak selection when I went wasn't great as it isn't my go to.

Yeah I've never had a good rump steak here. But, never had a good steak here period tbh. It's not bad, it's just not like at home, where it's pretty much the best meal you can have after lobster.

[CoccoBill]

Why aren't airplanes covered with solar panels?

[OngBonga]

Probably because the energy they create would not be sufficient to account for their weight.

[CoccoBill]

That can't be, there are even solar powered planes:

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...the-world-trip

Would think that flying above the clouds would be a pretty optimal place to use solar, maybe not to power a passenger aircraft but to at least power entertainment systems and whatnot. Obviously they should be made of a material that's sturdy enough to replace some of the existing material on the fuselage or wings, not just be straight add-on weight. Like Elon's roof tiles.

[OngBonga]

I'd guess there's also an aerodynamic issue. Any increased drag will use more fuel. So they would need to be perfectly flat, and also made or protected by a material that is strong enough to withstand the forces.

The solar plane, that looks pretty small and light, compared to a passenger aircraft.

[CoccoBill]

Oh absolutely it must be a super light plane, but that's actually powered by nothing but solar, it's not just used to turn on the lights and tv screens inside it. Apparently there's shit like 3 microns thick solar panel films with efficiency measured in kW/kg, but those may be a tad expensive still.

[MadMojoMonkey]

We use planes because they're fast.

r.e. https://www.theguardian.com/environm...the-world-trip
"The plane flies at about 30 mph."

Solar powered planes are not the future.

[Jack Sawyer]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a8693566.html

Banking while black

[OngBonga]

What evidence is there to suggest this is a racially motivated incident?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Happy day, ya nerds.
Whatever your affiliations, hope you have a good one.

[a500lbgorilla]

Merry God Damned Christmas, Boys

I hope you're having a bit of relief and feeling a bit of love in this season.

[boost]

What happened here? Is wuf dead? Did he immigrate full time to /the_donald full time?

[oskar]

I think Trump supporters are in a bit of limbo atm. I don't care how much you love the man - 17 investigations is a lot of investigations. There has to be some inkling that this administration won't have a happy ending.

Happy holidays everyone! I say happy holidays, because I'm at war with christmas!

[Jack Sawyer]

Merry christmas everyone!

[Poopadoop]

Watching the MSM try to report on Trump as if he's anything other than a moron who fell ass backwards into the most powerful position in the world through a perfect storm of Hillary's unelectableness and Putin's interference is kinda amusing. If he weren't president but instead they were doing a reality TV show about him, you'd see him going through staff left and right, sleeping with skanky porn stars, and babbling nonsense every day, and you'd question whether it was scripted because you'd think no-one in real life could be such an amazing combination of stupid and obnoxious.

Also, happy holidays guys!

[OngBonga]

Happy 1481st anniversary of the completion of the Hagia Sophia, everyone.

[Savy]

I've had the same shitty windows phone for years now and it was shitty when I bought it. Finally upgraded to a solid budget phone and it's so nice to have basic functionality that works well not to mention access to an actual app store that people make apps for.

[oskar]

You know how they say: You can build 1000 bridges, but fuck one horse and what do they call you?
My dad built one bridge in 1984. Since then: nothing but horse fucking. And he's still like: why do people focus so much on the horse fucking? Remember the bridge?!

[Poopadoop]

You know how they say: You can build 1000 bridges, but fuck one horse and what do they call you? My dad built one bridge in 1984. Since then: nothing but horse fucking. And he's disappointed because everyone still talks about the bridge

fyp

[oskar]

I don't get it.

[Poopadoop]

The joke is your dad is ashamed of building a bridge and proud of being a horse fucker.

[oskar]

I get it! That's actually pretty close to what's happening.

[Poopadoop]

Haven't heard from Ong lately on his plan to get rich playing NLE. Meanwhile I am stomping the low stakes in PLO; up $1k in the last month. Game of the future boys - the best part is nobody seems to know how to play it.

[Savy]

Haven't heard from Ong lately on his plan to get rich playing NLE. Meanwhile I am stomping the low stakes in PLO; up $1k in the last month. Game of the future boys - the best part is nobody seems to know how to play it.

And you know how to play it because?

[Poopadoop]

And you know how to play it because?

The usual way. Reading books, watching vids, reviewing hands, etc.

[MadMojoMonkey]

PLO is crazy high variance. If you can stomach it, then you're capable of crushing the low-mid stakes, I bet. People gamble too much in PLO because of the variance, so if you're sensible about starting hands and pot odds, you can clean up... just the swings are too much for me.

[Poopadoop]

That's the thing, people in general just play way too many hands , some have a vpip > 60, and some just refuse to fold no matter what happens preflop. It's the whole idea that 'any hand can win'. Sure it CAN...

As far as gambling/variance goes, if you're getting it in good more often than not, you'll do alright in the long run.

[Savy]

Low stakes PLO is an absolute rake trap and your edge will be pretty small on the field even if they are spewing. If you're playing 50nl or something I wouldn't get too excited about an extra 1k a month.

As far as gambling/variance goes, if you're getting it in good more often than not, you'll do alright in the long run.

The long run is hundreds of thousands of hands.

[MadMojoMonkey]

The long run is hundreds of thousands of hands.

That assumes a winrate of ~20bb/100 hands. For a more realistic winrate, a million is prob more accurate... I haven't crunched those numbers in a long time, but IIRC 300k hands is where your linear winrate finally beats out the variance, which increases (expands, really) as the square root of hands played, assuming a winrate of 20 bb/100 hands.

Well, specifically what I'm saying is that IF your winrate is 20 bb/100 hands, AND you've played at least 300k hands at that rate, then it's less than 5% chance your BR will be in the red at that time, and decreasingly so as you play more and more hands.
That same result says it's less than 5% chance you'll have more than 2x your EV winnings, as it is symmetrical above and below the EV line.

[Poopadoop]

That assumes a winrate of ~20bb/100 hands. For a more realistic winrate, a million is prob more accurate... I haven't crunched those numbers in a long time, but IIRC 300k hands is where your linear winrate finally beats out the variance, which increases (expands, really) as the square root of hands played, assuming a winrate of 20 bb/100 hands.

Well, specifically what I'm saying is that IF your winrate is 20 bb/100 hands, AND you've played at least 300k hands at that rate, then it's less than 5% chance your BR will be in the red at that time, and decreasingly so as you play more and more hands.
That same result says it's less than 5% chance you'll have more than 2x your EV winnings, as it is symmetrical above and below the EV line.

All of this depends on the standard deviation.

The long run is whatever it takes the winrate to converge. Can be 100k hands, can be a million.

I'm not assuming my 18bb/100 @ 50k hands or w/e is good evidence I'm a winner long run. I'm convinced I'm a winner because of the mistakes I see others making, and the fact that 1/3 of my opponents is basically a retard.

[Savy]

All of this depends on the standard deviation.

The long run is whatever it takes the winrate to converge. Can be 100k hands, can be a million.

I'm not assuming my 18bb/100 @ 50k hands or w/e is good evidence I'm a winner long run. I'm convinced I'm a winner because of the mistakes I see others making, and the fact that 1/3 of my opponents is basically a retard.

I'm not doubting you are winning, if you put the work in it's very possible. Just look at your rake paid and work that out as a bb/100 amount and it'll no doubt shock you. I imagine you're looking at somewhere in the region of 5-25bb/100 in rake paid, it's ridiculous.

So maximum winrates are very limited even with people are spewing and they probably aren't as badly as you think.

What's your history with playing NLHE out of interest? PLO always makes me think I should learn it but NLHE has enough variance for me adding more just sounds awful unless you're crushing.

[Poopadoop]

I'm not doubting you are winning, if you put the work in it's very possible. Just look at your rake paid and work that out as a bb/100 amount and it'll no doubt shock you. I imagine you're looking at somewhere in the region of 5-25bb/100 in rake paid, it's ridiculous.

Prolly. But if you're beating the rake, you're beating the game.

So maximum winrates are very limited even with people are spewing and they probably aren't as badly as you think.

Haha, you have no idea.

One hand I played the other day, a guy called my QQJJ EP raise with 88xx on the button. Fine. We're both up a lot and sitting about 300 bb deep. Flop came J83r. I pot, he repots, back and fourth three or four times till we're all in. So he basically jammed 300 bb in on a hand that was either flipping with a big draw like QJT9 or had about 7% eq vs. JJ.

Another guy had JJxx, flop came J88, he checks behind. Turn comes K. Guess who had KK? That guy went broke too.

Getting set over setted happens a lot in this game. You can't just go nuts with middle set sitting deep.

What's your history with playing NLHE out of interest? PLO always makes me think I should learn it but NLHE has enough variance for me adding more just sounds awful unless you're crushing.

Never played much NL except donkaments. I played mostly LHE before black friday. I was a decent winner at 3/6 and 5/10. Then the games got infested with regs and it was no longer profitable.

[MadMojoMonkey]

All of this depends on the standard deviation.

This is fair. When I was doing those calculations, it was assuming 80 - 100 bb/100 hands. That's standard for NLHE, but I assume PLO is probably at least on the high end of that.

The long run is whatever it takes the winrate to converge. Can be 100k hands, can be a million.

That's not the way I posed the question and as you know the specific question you pose makes all the difference.
I was asking, "given winrate and variance, how many hands until it's less than 5% chance that you'd be in the red."
The expected winrate is a line passing through the origin, and the 90% CI is a "sideways parabola" (proportional to the square root of number of hands played) which is symmetric, vertically, about the winrate line. So the lower arm of that parabola is increasingly below the winrate line at an ever-decreasing slope... eventually the winrate line (assuming non-0 slope) dominates, but there is no "convergence" as such.

I'm not assuming my 18bb/100 @ 50k hands or w/e is good evidence I'm a winner long run. I'm convinced I'm a winner because of the mistakes I see others making, and the fact that 1/3 of my opponents is basically a retard.

I'd be shocked if you weren't a winner, too. It's just not mathematically viable to worry about it, is my greater point.
Assuming you are beating the stakes, if you are just bankrolling all your winnings, then you'll be playing at higher stakes long before it's mathematically proven that you were beating the lower stakes. New stakes probably means new villains means new winrate and new variance, so you can't usually compile the results from different stakes and get sensible results.

EDIT: wait... isn't the expected variance for NLHE 80 - 100 bb/hand, not per 100 hands?
Whatever... I knew what I was doing at the time. I have that spreadsheet at home somewhere, but no MS Office on my home PC this time around. Not sure how to open the file and see what I did, but prob plenty of free options if I care to look for them.

[Poopadoop]

Variance is higher in PLO, typically 120-200 bb/100.

And, it's per 100 hand samples. If it were per hand, you'd typically be winning/losing more than your stack every hand. For some players, that might be true, but I'm not in that category of spew.

My own variance is 138 bb/100. With 18bb/100 winrate over 50k hands, the 95% confidence interval limits are ~ 5bb and 30 bb. It's enough to know I'm almost certainly a winner, but not enough to know how much of a winner. Could be scraping by, or could be killing. Prolly somewhere in the middle. So I guess there is pretty good evidence I'm winning.

Don't know about moving up. I don't really have time to become a full on expert. I've only played as high as .25/.50 and only when the games are good. I imagine once you get to 1/2 and beyond it's mostly pros and not many 60 VPIP droolers.

[Poopadoop]

The expected winrate is a line passing through the origin, and the 90% CI is a "sideways parabola" (proportional to the square root of number of hands played) which is symmetric, vertically, about the winrate line. So the lower arm of that parabola is increasingly below the winrate line at an ever-decreasing slope... eventually the winrate line (assuming non-0 slope) dominates, but there is no "convergence" as such.

Not sure what you mean by this. "The CI gets narrower with larger samples" was what I meant by "convergence"

Edit: Ha, I should be even clearer. The CI of your WINRATE gets narrower, not the CI of your expected winnings.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Ha, I should be even clearer. The CI of your WINRATE gets narrower, not the CI of your expected winnings.

Yeah. I was assuming I know the winrate and variance to project expected change_in_BR after N hands. At the time it was to dispel some spurious claims of "crushing the micros" being made relatively commonly in the Beginner's Circle.
I was so popular back then... sheesh. Well... they had some grounds to stand on... I am, in fact, actually a big nerd IRL. I know. The shock you must now feel to hear this. Rest assured. This polished, charismatic monkey persona which you all love and adore is a facade. IRL, I'm much more awkward and foolish. Can I get a delete button for IRL?

In retrospect, it makes more sense to assert the known values, which is number of hands and total change in BR, then you can calculate the variance based on a BR history, provided you were tracking BR on a hand-by-hand basis, or just assume something sensible (probably make multiple assumptions and explore the solution space).

[OngBonga]

I was going to say something about variance and rake, but immediately felt like I was doing a savy.

Crush it.

As for my attempt to go pro, I failed. I'm taking a break from poker. I still made over £400 so it was worth it. Maybe I'll try again another time. For now, I'm going to focus on ebay.

[Savy]

I was going to say something about variance and rake, but immediately felt like I was doing a savy.

Crush it.

As for my attempt to go pro, I failed. I'm taking a break from poker. I still made over £400 so it was worth it. Maybe I'll try again another time. For now, I'm going to focus on ebay.

And this post shows how often I am right.

[Savy]

Haha, you have no idea.

I never do yet I'm always right. What bb/100 are you paying in rake so far? It's as simple as looking at that, factoring in how much you have to win due to posting blinds as often as you do and it's obvious that huge win rates just can't happen.

Also your sample size variance will most likely be very wrong compared to it's true value when you are on a massive heater.

I'm never trying to put people down in posts like this it's just important to be realistic with expectations you'll make more in the long run rather than packing it in when you go on your first 40BI downswing.

[Poopadoop]

I was going to say something about variance and rake, but immediately felt like I was doing a savy.

No reason to steal his move.

Crush it.

Thanks.

As for my attempt to go pro, I failed. I'm taking a break from poker. I still made over £400 so it was worth it. Maybe I'll try again another time. For now, I'm going to focus on ebay.

Ah.

[Poopadoop]

I never do yet I'm always right. What bb/100 are you paying in rake so far?

I don't see how is this relevant. I'm winning good AFTER rake is taken away. Am I supposed to look at it and decide I shouldn't be playing b/c I'm paying too much rake?

[Savy]

I don't see how is this relevant. I'm winning good AFTER rake is taken away. Am I supposed to look at it and decide I shouldn't be playing b/c I'm paying too much rake?

It's obvious why. I literally explain in my post. Regardless what's stopping you from looking at posting it even if it's only for my curiosity.

And no, don't stop playing, move up. If you're winning at 18bb/100 you're at least crushing the next step up.

[Poopadoop]

I never do yet I'm always right. What bb/100 are you paying in rake so far? It's as simple as looking at that, factoring in how much you have to win due to posting blinds as often as you do and it's obvious that huge win rates just can't happen.

For whatever it means to you, I've paid less rake than I've won in monies since I started up about a month ago. Still not sure how this becomes relevant since I'm calculating my winrate after rake is taken away.

Also your sample size variance will most likely be very wrong compared to it's true value when you are on a massive heater.

There's no reason to think being on a heater/cooler would intrinsically affect your variance. That is mostly down to how loose or nitty you play.

There's also no reason to think I'm on a "massive heater." My all-in equity is actually slightly above my winrate, so if anything evidence suggests I'm on a small cooler. Also, see the CI discussion above about the range of probability within which my true winrate likely lies.

I'm never trying to put people down in posts like this it's just important to be realistic with expectations you'll make more in the long run rather than packing it in when you go on your first 40BI downswing.

I'm not either and don't take this the wrong way, but I think it's common knowledge you can be a bit of a party pooper.

Also, you're not talking to a teenager here who just started playing poker and thinks he's Phil Hellmuth 'cause he won his first three hands at 1c/2c. I teach stats in uni, so I'm pretty sure I understand more about variance as a concept than probably the average person.

[Poopadoop]

It's obvious why. I literally explain in my post.

All your post said was 'it's impossible to beat a game for anything reasonable after paying rake'. Also 'something something posting blinds' (like I'm the only one at the table who has to post blinds lol).

I guess I'd find that easier to agree with if I wasn't doing it myself.

Regardless what's stopping you from looking at posting it even if it's only for my curiosity.

It's around $700, so 12.5 bb/100 I guess.

And no, don't stop playing, move up. If you're winning at 18bb/100 you're at least crushing the next step up.

I never think about it this way. I think about what table is profitable and do I have the br to play in it. I'm rolled for about .25/.50 now, so I'll play anything from that level downwards until I have 30 BI for .50/1. We'll see what happens.

[Poopadoop]

when you go on your first 40BI downswing.

Just curious, how many of these have you had?

[Savy]

Just curious, how many of these have you had?

Zero as I don't play enough volume and the games I play in my winrate is pretty high but only because I play very low. 10+BI downswings quite a few.

Playing PLO at any sort of decent level 40BI downswings are fairly common.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Basically, anything over about 20 - 22 bb/100 hands is a pipe dream. Even when top pros used to do those "start from a freeroll and build up a huge BR" challenges a while back, none of them were boasting winrates over about that much (IIRC).

So if you're a top pro, you can make maaaybe 25 bb/100 against blowhole-breathers. Realistically, for a non-pro, something like 15-ish is probably more likely. Honestly, you're not a top pro, nothing harsh about saying that.

If your estimated rake is ~12 bb/100 hands, and your winrate is expected to be ~15 bb/100, then your gross winrate is going to be less than 5 bb/100 hands. Anything too far in excess of that is just not sustainable.

[Poopadoop]

Well, I doubt a pro takes their A game to the micros, but w/e.

I can't see Phil Galfond sitting there taking notes on the guy who's 80/10.

[OngBonga]

Just curious, how many of these have you had?

I basically had two of these in the space of four weeks. I went from £50 to £500 in days, I know I can play poker, but I can't handle the brutal downswings.

[Savy]

I basically had two of these in the space of four weeks. I went from £50 to £500 in days, I know I can play poker, but I can't handle the brutal downswings.

So, was I right?