|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 9/6/2008 10:20:01 AM PACIFIC |
 figuring hourly rate, C.A. Adkins, 24. Oct 2003 02:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In regards to hourly rate when you have a session that lasts say 1:20 minutes would that be rounded up to 2:00 or do you just add all your minutes up to make hours. Seems like this could make a big difference. Thanks for any input. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Roy Cooke, 24. Oct 2003 07:23 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi C.A. Keep track of the minutes too...You are right, it will add up to a big difference. Life is Good :-) Roy Cooke on 24. Oct 2003 02:41 C.A. Adkins wrote: > In regards to hourly rate when you have a session that lasts say 1:20 minutes > would that be rounded up to 2:00 or do you just add all your minutes up to make > hours. Seems like this could make a big difference. Thanks for any input. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Aisthesis, 24. Oct 2003 16:00 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Just how much monitoring of one's performance is really necessary and advisable? I play almost exclusively online, so it's pretty easy to get hand histories and analyse bad play, but I really haven't taken advantage of that as much as I should have. I would be interested to know it the following is enough: 1) If you're up a healthy amount at the end of the day, don't worry, you're doing it right, so just keep playing. 2) If you lose your buy-in or just stagnate at a table, habitually request a hand history so you'll have it to analyse. 3) Then on a weekly and monthly basis, check your wins or losses. If you're happy with them, again don't worry about it much and just keep doing what you're doing. If not, try to figure out what's holding you back and try to adjust accordingly. I know that's a bare minimum, but it seems to me like it might be sufficient. What is "typical" (sorry, as I'm sure there's ENORMOUS variation there) self-monitoring for professional players? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 24. Oct 2003 16:09 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| www.pokertracker.com also, there is a thread here about results, and someone has a excel thingy they can email you for free. its above this post. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, 4 POKER, 24. Oct 2003 16:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 24. Oct 2003 16:09 modestmice wrote: > www.pokertracker.com > > also, there is a thread here about results, and someone has a excel thingy they can email you > for free. its above this post. > (LOL)> an "excel thingy".......you're the best, you really are! | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 24. Oct 2003 16:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| heh, i doubt it, but thanks. also, 4play, can u weigh in on the "tell" post. i wanted a pro's opinion. ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, 4 POKER, 24. Oct 2003 18:03 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 24. Oct 2003 16:59 modestmice wrote: > heh, i doubt it, but thanks. > also, 4play, can u weigh in on the "tell" post. i wanted a pro's opinion. "4play"? Is THAT the name you're giving me now? (ROTFLMAO)!! I think I liked it better when you were calling me Steve! And just for that........ "No soup for you"! 4 POKER ********************************* > "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and > last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 24. Oct 2003 18:18 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| awww man, i was just joshin... | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, 4 POKER, 24. Oct 2003 18:23 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 24. Oct 2003 18:18 modestmice wrote: > awww man, i was just joshin... No s***! ....I know that silly! (LOL). | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 24. Oct 2003 18:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| LOL, you got me on 24. Oct 2003 18:23 4 POKER wrote: > on 24. Oct 2003 18:18 modestmice wrote: > > awww man, i was just joshin... > > > > No s***! ....I know that silly! (LOL). > ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Aisthesis, 25. Oct 2003 17:45 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Wow! poker tracker looks PHENOMENAL!! Since downloading the thing last night I was able to put the 3 tourneys I played yesterday plus 44 ring games from yesterday, then another 44 I played after downloading, and I'm already amazed!!! Amusing at this stage is that I'm losing a little on AKo (only 2 hands) while winning on about everything else--no matches drawn on either of my AK hands where others got Q pair or trips... (if AK proves to me my weakness, that will have to be one of the weirdest quirks imaginable) I noticed Roy Cooke and others mentioning to one guy that 1500 hands is not really enough to make accurate assessments of play yet, although I'm assuming that as you get up around 1,000, you're starting actually to get a moderately accurate picture of your game. About where would you guys put the mark where one has a statistically relevant pool of hands? at least 5,000 or so? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Brian462, 25. Oct 2003 18:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm at over 2,000 hands and KK has yet to win and is still one of my biggest money losers. It takes MANY hands to get a statistically relevant idea of which hands are your "problem hands". When running simulations on Wilson I will notice deviations for as far as 100,000 hands and much more occasionally. Remember that your chance of making some hands such as a Royal Flush is more than even 1 in 500,000 so you really are not getting a COMPLETE picture until you reach many many millions of hands, and even then there's always a chance you will have a descrepancy. There is no set number of hands where everything becomes "right" so there is absolutely no way to know if you are looking at bad play or bad luck. Instead of trying to get a statistically relevant idea of your play of hands right now, look at each place where you suspect that you may have a leak. For instance, look over every AK you have played and determine if you could have done better in each individual situation. If the answer is no, then chalk it up to bad luck. If it continues to be a problem then reevaluate that hand. Over time if you notice other descrepancies among other hands then use those as a start in determining what part of your game to evaluate next, but don't take it as evidence in itself. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 25. Oct 2003 18:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| not to be picky but isnt a royal 1-35,000? ----------------------------------------------------- "I prefer talking with old persons of the female sex who peddle family gossip; next, with the insane-and last, with very sensible people" -S. Kierkegaard | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Brian462, 25. Oct 2003 18:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think 35,000 is the chance of having a royal flush happen in a 10 person hold'em game. I was cross-thinking and slipped in the chance of YOU being dealt a Pat royal in a 5-card game. In hold'em the chance of you making one is closer to 1 in 300,000 plus I believe. (assuming you stay to the end if you have any sort of chance at one) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate (royal flush), Aisthesis, 26. Oct 2003 01:02 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Brian's original point makes a lot of sense. Actually, KK is pretty interesting, as I've had several AA vs. KK hands, and with huge pre-flop action get pretty worried when I'm on the KK end of it. Amusing anecdote (not in my database 'cause it was a while ago): I'm sitting on AA and get in a raising battle with one other guy pre-flop. He stops it just before I was thinking it was time for the all-in (which I certainly had no problem with pre-flop since I'm sitting on the best possible hand). I'm assuming he's sitting on KK, maybe AK suited. Flop shows K-X-X, and i get worried but bet out pot, to which my opponent responds with an all-in (I think I had a little more than half my chips already in the pot by then). I assume he has pocket KK, making the set, and fold. Turns out he had AA to my AA, so I was the sucker. Actually, I'd be interested to know if you guys think my fold really was bad play, as I'm a bit undecided. On the royal flush issue, I'm pretty sure the following is right: There are (52!)/(45!)(7!) possible 7 card hands (without multiple countings of permutations--I'm pretty sure eliminating the permutations is legit in this case and it certainly makes counting the royal flushes easier). Of these, there are 4(48)(47) royal flushes. So the odds should be: 4(48)(47)(45!)(7!)/(52!) = 12/177,905 or one in just a little less than 15,000. Hence, if you'll give me 35,000:1 odds, I'll bet you, oh, let's say $3 on it... :) | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 26. Oct 2003 17:21 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| ok, brian wins the worst odds skills contest | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Aisthesis, 26. Oct 2003 16:48 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Sorry guys... you're absolutely right on the odds for a RF showing up on a random 7-card deal. In my previous post, I counted more royal flushes than there actually are. In reality, it's: 4(47)(46)/2 rather than 4(48)(47)... Four royal flushes, then 47 random cards left not counted in the RF itself (don't know what I was thinking in using 48 last time), then 46 cards left as additional "kickers." But each set of kickers was counted twice on that calculation, hence division by 2, bringing the whole thing to right around 1/35,000. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, modestmice, 26. Oct 2003 17:22 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| wheres my money, math genius? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: figuring hourly rate, Aisthesis, 25. Oct 2003 00:37 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hey, thanks! I'll have to try that out. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|