Is .9 BB/100 below expectation that bad?

[300HPGOD]

Coming off a few bad beats in a tourney I of course have a little steam coming out of my ears but do have a question for those HUD experts out there. Is running .9 BBs/100 below EV just a little bad, really bad, or in the range of basically normal? Ive been thinking about it and a part of me thinks its not that bad and basically normal while another part of me thinks wait a minute... it is only .9 bbs/100 but I am about 12.8 BBs/100 as it is so that means I am about 7% lower than I should be. When you look at it that way that feels like a lot after 100k hands.

Want to know your opinion on on it and if you care to share what you are running at and/or want to post a screenshot of your HUD.

 

[fundiver199]

I dont know the actual math / statistics of, how far out the bell curve this is, but my feeling it, its a pretty small deviation over 100k hands. I also think, people tend to get way to hung up on those all-in EV calculations. Its really only a part of variance, so you cant even say, you have been "unlucky" overall. Maybe you coolered the opponents more often, than they coolered you, or you sucked out on them, when all the chips were not in the middle.

Just to give a small example last night one of my SnGs ended, when my AQ ran into AA. This does not show up on the all-in EV calculation, since my AQ was basicially drawing dead. But it sure as hell is extremely unlucky to run a strong hand like AQ into the one hand, which has you drawing almost dead, and which you block. If I had sucked out on him, then it would have shown up as being very lucky on the EV calculation. But this is actually misleading, because the play from both opponents was totally standard, so regardless who win, that person got lucky.

 

[300HPGOD]

I dont know the actual math / statistics of, how far out the bell curve this is, but my feeling it, its a pretty small deviation over 100k hands. I also think, people tend to get way to hung up on those all-in EV calculations. Its really only a part of variance, so you cant even say, you have been "unlucky" overall. Maybe you coolered the opponents more often, than they coolered you, or you sucked out on them, when all the chips were not in the middle.

Just to give a small example last night one of my SnGs ended, when my AQ ran into AA. This does not show up on the all-in EV calculation, since my AQ was basicially drawing dead. But it sure as hell is extremely unlucky to run a strong hand like AQ into the one hand, which has you drawing almost dead, and which you block. If I had sucked out on him, then it would have shown up as being very lucky on the EV calculation. But this is actually misleading, because the play from both opponents was totally standard, so regardless who win, that person got lucky.

I tend to agree with a lot of this and yes feel the same way when I run KK into AA. I clearly did nothing wrong and it doesnt appear I ran bad since I am only 20% ish but very unlucky to run into the best starting hand when I have 2nd best starting hand. Out of curiosity, if you dont mind what does your HUD say you are running at?

 

[fundiver199]

Out of curiosity, if you dont mind what does your HUD say you are running at?

PT4 does not calculate all-in adjusted EV in BB/100 for tournament hands. Which by the way makes sense, because winning a few BB more or less in the early blind levels is way less important than winning or losing them on the final table. Instead PT4 calculate all-in adjusted C. I dont really care all that much about this number for the reasons already explained, but PT4 has registered my total life time winnings in tournaments on Stars as 3.046$, while the all-in adjusted C is registered as around 2.400$. So apparently I have been running a bit hot, when all the chips were in the middle, and this is over 8.639 tournaments, most of which are SnGs.