Twisting Stats

So lets have some fun......

I know that I have read DM telling us that each individual hand is unique and not connected to the previous, or next hand so trying to find patterns in the cards is stupid. I tend to agree but every now and then it happens.

I also remember a thread which (in jest) suggested that every hand you get involved with was a 50-50 situation, you either won it or lost it. Card odds be damned, it was 50-50. Not sure DM got the humor of that thread.

Yet here he seems to be arguing a very similar, but not exact, scenario. Even tho you might be favored in a series of contests, even big favorites, in the end you are but a 50-50 guest in the series.

So, what does this mean? IDHAFC ! But lets invent a improbable example;

9 seat STT and in 8 hands it gets HU. Player AvB (A vs B) all in, then CvD, then EvF, then GvH, leaving I as the short stack at the 5th hand. Remaining players are ACEG and I.

Another round pits AvC, EvG, leaving I as the short stack. A and E won.

Field is AEI with A and E each with 4 times the chips I have er, ah has.

AvE takes out E, leaving A with 8x the chips I have/has. Confused yet? I am.

Lets say for this invention that A got AA 3 times in a row and was that 80% favorite in each hand and they all held. Overall he was .8 x.8 x.8 to win that series......works out to be 51.2% of the time that that will be the outcome.

I however, was 100% to not lose any chips and that held (convenient for this invention is that I was the button to start it.)

OK HU A v I.

I start(s) out an 8-1 dog, needing to double up 2 times to get about even. (x,2x,4x) making I just a 5-4 dog. Lets also say that A now goes back to getting AA again in HU AI situations. Regardless of my I's cards, A run of AA's will no longer be the favorite! Continuing from the 51.2% stat, it goes to 40,9%, then 32.7% then 26.2% etc, until AA has no reasonable chance at all of winning.

So if the stats hold true, I wins this match as the stats are in his favor from the moment HU starts.

If you take this too serious I will reign on your parade........

hmm interesting post...let's just say that it should be true in theory but it's not in practice.I've already won 6 big hands one after the other on a 6-max table live(I'm precising that it's live cuz I don't think it would work that way in an online program). The jest you are talking about is more true than false, in many games you'll see 9-2o winning AIPF against AQ many times without seeing the "right" thing happening for the rest of the night...And we might argue that the next time these people meet the weaker player will lose all of his weaker AIPF but we're not sure that's the case.

Truth be told, the best way to play poker is to play the solid way but take chances when we're a 30 to 70 dog and getting lucky once!(catching our OESD or flush)Then we'll be able to sustain a beat we'll get while playing good without affecting us that much since we made off with someone else's chips thanks to a beat...So to me the trick is following odds, but choosing when to not follow it and hopefully get lucky then play our best .

Confusing ?

Why do I get the niggling feeling that you're not being entirely serious, dj?

define niggling.....