I am a solid recreational NL50 player, and I have learned a technique that really helps that I haven't seen published anywhere, which is to only buy in one table once a week at your new stake. This gets you used to the new stake at very low risk whilst you are still confidently making money at your current stake.
Such a clear way of explaining poker theory and money management. This videos are pure gold. This are best free poker related videos out there. Keep it going!
This video really is something I have waited for so long. Everybody just says "uh just play 100 buy ins, 200 buy ins... the more conservative the better" and nobody is talking about how to move up in stakes. Incredibly valuble lesson! Edit: P. S. I am one of those who was not aggressive enough with brm and basically made bo money the last year
Phil Hellmuth has a great quote in his old book about luck vs skill in poker - it obviously scales with the amount of money on the line as well (not just number of hands). Can clearly observe this from a free game where everyone just goes all in every hand.
Good to keep in mind as well, starting w a lower bankroll ie $1k, going full Kelly or riskier is acceptable given it’s pretty easy to make $1k back elsewhere and start over.
This excellent video fails to mention that your personal risk profile should include bankroll size as a major factor. If my bankroll were 5 thousand, I'd happily accept a 20% risk of ruin, since 5K is relatively easy to rebuild. If my bankroll were 5 million, I'd would be nervous with even a 5% risk of ruin, although as one's bankroll increases there is more room to de-escalate amounts risked once during downswing. Failure to protect huge bankrolls has created disasters for some of the biggest names in poker.
Realistically if you have a positive winrate there's close to 0 risk of ruin if you're willing to to step down stakes, so while you might have 40 buyins at your normal stake, when going down you have 40 buyins again or more and you can repeat that. Not to mention your winrate should somewhat increase when facing players weaker than your usual stakes which should further lower your risk of ruin.
When doing these kinds of calculations WR you should put in is your post rake WR+ rakeback-money you'll withdraw. Also these risk of ruin calculation paints a much darker picture then it is realistically. If you have 1.5k BR for NL50, you won't burn whole BR without ever moving down and with moving down RoR gets almost exponentially smaller. They are good for assessing the chances of a shoot working out.
This was very clearly explained!! thank you for sharing the resources as well ! I play short deck, for what I gathered,BB\ 100 is usually much higher if a winning player. Thanks agin, subscribed :)
That's scary to see how bad the variance can be even after 100k hands. So the live tournament players (where the variance is even worse) like Daniel Negreanu, maybe they are just lucky? Because how long would it take in live tournaments to play 100k hands? Playing 50 hours a week live tournaments every single week, it would take about 15 years to play 100k hands.
I guess variance is calculated more in number of tournaments played rather than number of hands. Plus, I bet Negreanu also plays a lot of online tournaments, he may play thousands of tournaments a year.
I'm not sure if the variance is worse for everyone in Live MTTs. I for one can guarantee I will cash at least 30% of Live MTTs over a decent Live sample. Alot of players have a much bigger edge Live.
Really nice Explanations and Breakdown overall, thank you very much! But i don't really get how do i know my winrate or if i'm a winnig player and my Standard Deviation when just starting out? How does BRM work for tournament poker? Where im from it's only legal to play Tournaments but not cashgames.
30:29 However, I assume at high level of HU SnG the game is more difficult so the ROI will decrease, so the ROI and buy-in levels affects each other. How can we still use this formula?
You can adjust your edge to reflect the tougher games. The explanation for how to do this is shown at 31:16 For a HU SnG you can simplify to this formula f* = ROI% For example, if your edge at the higher stakes is 2% you'd risk no more 2% of your bankroll per match.
Thoughts on cashgames vs tournaments at low stakes? Gone from $25-110-15-60 in the last few weeks, ~6.5k hands played. Went from 110-15 by going on a losing streak, losing often in "flips" where I had 70-80% equity, almost always in tournaments. Went from 15-60 yesterday, $10 from cashgames, $35 profit from tournaments, total buyins of $18. My issue is, it's hard to multi table since I live in Ontario, so my player pool is very limited on PokerStars. Tournaments seem to require a string of luck, but I am capable of normally atleast mincashing 200-600 fields(if I'm not playing to win, which is how I always lose "big"), and I often place well in $1-$3 50-80 player tournaments.
How about i just do playing not having a bankroll but i just do play once twice in a week that depends on my salary. i just limit it to 1/10 of my salary. if i run good i target it to make it x5 of it then i stop this is in CG. if run bad then its over for the month. in MTT i just make an allotment to two table buy in once in a week.
Part of the problem is that risk is not stable or predictable so to use a kelly type system isnt really viable s well as the fact that the unit is not infinitely divisible.
That's a fair criticism. I find that Kelly still works despite stakes being discrete, as there's still an aspect of reinvestment and compounding returns. However it's not perfect. The risk being unstable is a big part of the reason that people recommend half-kelly or quarter-kelly strategies.
It doesn't matter how many hands per hour you play? For example in live poker its gonna be around 25hands/hour, online it could be 400 hands/hour. But you can play higher limits in live than online. What's best then? Isn't best to take $/hour instead of bb/100 ($/100)?
Both are valid. $/hr is better for live games, bb/100 is better for online. Either measurement works so long as you correctly adjust the winrate and variance.
I really loved this video! It helped me put my current downswing (15 BI) in a context and make me feel less stupid. Just a question: I am a micro player and at 5NL I have an insane 350 BB/100 standard dev (200 at 2NL), but I don't play as a maniac (I am a 21/16/5 player), I just think I sometimes have value bet like God and sometimes been megacoolered/owned like a donk lol. Do you think I can afford to underestimate my standard dev when I am Kelly calculating for moving up or is it better to stick with it? Thank you :)
Hey, this might be useful info for you it helped me. Drop the word cooler, it's not useful, a bet that cannot be called by worse is a bluff. Secondly 21/16 is quite a large gap which would say you are likely flatting on the button good reason and also flatting all pairs in all seats. I'd be interested to hear
Are you sure you calculated your standard deviation correctly? That seems way too high. Maybe it's a sample size issue or maybe you've filtered for e.g. only 3bet pots.
@@GTOWizard I took it straight from PT4 without any filters, but I will double check maybe. Sample sizes for NL2 and NL5 are 70k and 40k respectively. Thanks!
@@GTOWizard I tried hand calculating a small sample of 7k hands and the result is 58bb/100! PT4 tells me 360bb/100. There might be a bug or I cannot calculate it properly :/
@GTOwizard How do I estimate my SDV for live? I track my results and it says BB/hour SDV is 80bb. I play on average 25 hands an hour. Would this therefore mean I just multiply by 4 so 320bb/100 SDV?
Great question! Standard deviation scales with the square root of the number of samples. If your standard deviation is 80bb per 25 hands, then your standard deviation per 100 hands is: 80 x sqrt(hands/25) = 80 x sqrt (100/25) = 160 bb/100 See the margin of error calculation in this article: blog.gtowizard.com/variance-and-bankroll-management/
@@GTOWizard ah shoot I think the maths in the tracker is wrong lol. For my 100hand sessions 50% of my results are outside Mu +\- 1.96*40 instead of 5%. Do you know what it is likely to actually be for live poker at 10/20/40 (I always input the game as 20/40 and buying 100bb deep 4k, rake is 3bb/100)? Trying to optimise my BR some more as I'm not sure if I can play the game or not ( btw this video was amazing)
nice .. ty .. but..1st u should explain stats & diferencies beetwen them like bb/100 & ev bb /100 in variance calculator i believe ev bb is the correct stat to use also .. size of bankroll & life style = what is most important for how variance effects life experience
Unfortunately it looks like the site is down. You can use primedope to figure out the minimum bankroll for a 5% RoR. The general formula for risk of ruin in poker looks like this: RoR = (1 - wr/sd)^(br/sd) * (1 + wr/sd)^(-br/sd) Where: RoR = Risk of Ruin, probability of busting if you never change stakes wr = win rate in dollars per hundred hands sd = standard deviation in dollars per hundred hands br = bankroll in dollars
My local casino - the 1/2 is $500 max buy in.... So at 35 buy ins you're saying a min of a $17,500 bank roll ? The 2/5 is $1500 max buy in, so that's $52,500 min bank roll? I just don't see how that's a feasible expectation in pretty much in any room in any casino. I'm not debating the math, just the reality.
You failed to calculate that if you have, lets say, a 5k BR for playing NL200, you actually don't have 25 buy-ins! You actually have much more: if you move down every time you lose 5 buy ins, you actually have 5buy-ins*(number of stakes until you cannot move down) + number of buy-ins left at the lowest stake. So in this case with a 5k BR (assuming a NL200->NL100->NL50->NL25->NL10->NL5->NL2 progression) you have 5*6=30 buyins +: 20buy-ins at NL200=40 buyins at NL100 35 buyins at NL100=70 buyins at NL50 65 buyins at NL50=130 buyins at NL25 125buyins at NL25=312,5 buyins at NL10 307,5 buyins at NL10=615 buyins at NL5 610 buyins at NL5=1525 buyins at NL2 5k BR at NL200=1555 buyins! That is completely insane. You are advocating for a BR strategy that is beyond ultra-conservative, and that will keep most players stuck in low stakes and demotivated.
Poker is luck primarily. The skill part is something you see Esfandiari do, by taking on mentally weak people and exploiting them. Some do it more obvious, other are more subtile (like Negreanu). Playing Online, with Rake involved, you need a edge greater than the rake(mathematically speaking). So winning 53% of your flips wouldnt cut it on a site like GG. And that deviation is already hard to achieve, even if you are an overperformer. If you can buy in for 1000 BB, that would not matter, because skill prevails when stacked this deep, there are also Rake benefits since the limit is designed for 100BB buy ins. This is the mainproblem and why, compared to live, only 5% of the playerbase can make money out of poker, and i assure you, they are only there because they were luckier than their pro-bretheren.
Actually I think you may have the concept of Gambler's Fallacy a bit skewed. The point that the example gives is that regardless of the perceived probabilities, there is no guarantee those probabilities will come true. No matter the sample size. In fact, the possibilities substantially out weigh the probabilities. So despite all the wonderous BS that solvers come up with, a good, strong exploitative strategy should be more reliable. No?
People have a tough time understanding the Gambler's Fallacy. My point here 6:55 is that coins and cards don't have memory. The expected value is to never catch up. If you start with a 6-point lead, on average, you will retain a 6-point lead. However, thanks the law of large numbers, after thousands of flips the proportion of heads and tails gets closer to 50%/50% just because that 6 point lead is tiny in comparison to thousands of flips. Similarly, if you run poorly in poker, there is no Karma that says you should run well later. The deck has no memory. You are just as likely to get coolered the next hand as you were the previous hand. However, in the long run, your edge will make this runbad variance look smaller and smaller in comparison. Now all of that said, none of this has anything to do with GTO or Exploitative ideas. None of this has anything to do with Solvers. It's just describing the nature of variance.
@GTOWizard yeah my variance usually has more to do with getting impatient after getting some bad hand like most people I guess. My God runs are getting longer, tilts more avoidable. lol
Everyone brings up the gamblers fallacy to make a point, but always leave out the other probability question; what's the chance of flipping the same side 7 times in a row. Yes the probabiliy of the next flip is 50/50 but there's also the probability of streaks.
It's the other side of the same question. Chances of flipping 7 heads in a row is low (0.5^7), but chances of flipping heads a 7th time AFTER you've already flipped 6 heads is 50-50.
@@GTOWizard Interesting philosophical question then, no? The short of it (as poker advice) you play the odds of the hand, not the streak, but the mystical side of it is, well, play the streak. Let's not put aside the other important adage of poker; you cant beat luck. Play your streak, but as is the point, streaks end and the hard part is knowing when that is.
I think that gamblers fallacy is misleading to a certain extent. If I go in to a bet where there are 10 coin flips... no more, no less..... and 9 times the coin hits heads...... There is a higher chance that the coin will hit tails on the 10th flip. Or I guess I should say there is a lower chance that it will hit heads again. There are equations for this. "What are the odds that heads will come up 10/10 flips"... the answer is the odds are low.... and there would not be an answer if the gambers fallacy was 100% accurate. The gamblers fallacy is assuming you're not playing a limited set of flips.... but you ARE. This seeming contradiction has never been adequately explained to me.
Ask yourself this. How does the coin remember the last 9 flips? How would the coin physically change it's properties to make the next flip more or less likely to be heads? What would happen if you whisper lies to the coin about the previous results? The probability that your next 10 flips are heads is very low. The probability that the very next flip is heads, given that you've already flipped it 9 times, is 50%.
@@GTOWizard According to probability, there is a 1/1024 chance of getting 10 consecutive heads (in a run of 10 flips in a row). This is according to wikipedia. And this is during an infinite amount of flips... I'm talking about 10 flips ONLY. If this is the case, and you only have 10 flips (remember you only have 10 flips)... and 9 of them have been heads already you have 50% chance to hit a 1/1024 occurance. (And yes I understand that the odds go down each time the coin turns up heads so by the time it hit's heads the ninth time it's around 50%). But that doesn't make sense. I mean it does... but it doesn't. I understand the logic behind the math.... on how it's supposed to be 50% but I swear to god I cannot reconcile this with the fact that ur only making 10 flips, and not infinity flips. If I martingaled a coin flip for 100k flips... would I end up even?
I try GTOWizard for free for around a month, and woow ! This is very good, help a lot.. I just upgrated to premiun, and really not regret it. I doubt myself a lot when i play, and with this i can quickly see if i made a mistake or not ( after the session of course), and now whatever the outcome, i am only satisfied if i made the correct decision. Awesome tool!! Thanks
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Tell us what bankroll management strategies worked well for you! What would you like to see next? 👀
bankroll management for MTT
Question. If you win at taking shots do you stay at the current level until you get back down? Or do you only take shots like once in a while
I punt. What's a bank roll management?
@@Tom_Bee_ why your stuck
@@bannana6290 I'm SO stuck. Been stuck every year for twenty years 😭
But I get invited to a lot of games....
The truth is... I'm going to fire big games far above what I should risk no matter how reasonable and well laid out this video is.
Nothing wrong with that as long as you have an income that will allow you to get back in the game
I am a solid recreational NL50 player, and I have learned a technique that really helps that I haven't seen published anywhere, which is to only buy in one table once a week at your new stake. This gets you used to the new stake at very low risk whilst you are still confidently making money at your current stake.
genius
Such a clear way of explaining poker theory and money management. This videos are pure gold. This are best free poker related videos out there. Keep it going!
This video really is something I have waited for so long. Everybody just says "uh just play 100 buy ins, 200 buy ins... the more conservative the better" and nobody is talking about how to move up in stakes. Incredibly valuble lesson!
Edit: P. S. I am one of those who was not aggressive enough with brm and basically made bo money the last year
Phil Hellmuth has a great quote in his old book about luck vs skill in poker - it obviously scales with the amount of money on the line as well (not just number of hands). Can clearly observe this from a free game where everyone just goes all in every hand.
10/10
Tombos' videos by far the best
Good to keep in mind as well, starting w a lower bankroll ie $1k, going full Kelly or riskier is acceptable given it’s pretty easy to make $1k back elsewhere and start over.
It's nice to see an explanation added to the usual "you need X buy-ins for Y stake" advice.
that will soon become THE reference about Bankroll Management !
Incredible value !
❤❤❤
This type of content is amazing. Even more incredible that it's free. Thank you so much 💪
This excellent video fails to mention that your personal risk profile should include bankroll size as a major factor. If my bankroll were 5 thousand, I'd happily accept a 20% risk of ruin, since 5K is relatively easy to rebuild. If my bankroll were 5 million, I'd would be nervous with even a 5% risk of ruin, although as one's bankroll increases there is more room to de-escalate amounts risked once during downswing. Failure to protect huge bankrolls has created disasters for some of the biggest names in poker.
Fair point! I didn't describe the utility of money much in this video but it's certainly something to consider.
Realistically if you have a positive winrate there's close to 0 risk of ruin if you're willing to to step down stakes, so while you might have 40 buyins at your normal stake, when going down you have 40 buyins again or more and you can repeat that. Not to mention your winrate should somewhat increase when facing players weaker than your usual stakes which should further lower your risk of ruin.
If you're worried about what you're risking then you shouldn't be playing poker
This should be the starter video for any new poker player. Or even to any experienced poker player.
Only people playing professionally need bankroll management honestly.
When doing these kinds of calculations WR you should put in is your post rake WR+ rakeback-money you'll withdraw.
Also these risk of ruin calculation paints a much darker picture then it is realistically. If you have 1.5k BR for NL50, you won't burn whole BR without ever moving down and with moving down RoR gets almost exponentially smaller. They are good for assessing the chances of a shoot working out.
Agreed, that's why I prefer the Kelly Criterion which assumes you're investing a fixed portion of your bankroll rather than playing till bust.
19:49 amazing tool very Nice vídeo! Ty!
Having the capacity to always max buy allows the player to always apply maximum pressure
This was very clearly explained!! thank you for sharing the resources as well ! I play short deck, for what I gathered,BB\ 100 is usually much higher if a winning player. Thanks agin, subscribed :)
High quality videos, thank you!
That's scary to see how bad the variance can be even after 100k hands. So the live tournament players (where the variance is even worse) like Daniel Negreanu, maybe they are just lucky? Because how long would it take in live tournaments to play 100k hands? Playing 50 hours a week live tournaments every single week, it would take about 15 years to play 100k hands.
I guess variance is calculated more in number of tournaments played rather than number of hands. Plus, I bet Negreanu also plays a lot of online tournaments, he may play thousands of tournaments a year.
I'm not sure if the variance is worse for everyone in Live MTTs. I for one can guarantee I will cash at least 30% of Live MTTs over a decent Live sample. Alot of players have a much bigger edge Live.
Live tournaments tend to offer a larger edge which helps mitigate the variance.
@@GTOWizard Do you think it's down to skill levels being lower live or is ir that some players can pick up on live tells and it increases their edge?
@@mig7290 IMO it’s because your edge against live fields is usually much larger
To understand
do we real +EV player
we should to look on EV excepted value
and divination there
I think I'm going to apply a 1/3 Kelly. Great advice.
Really nice Explanations and Breakdown overall, thank you very much! But i don't really get how do i know my winrate or if i'm a winnig player and my Standard Deviation when just starting out? How does BRM work for tournament poker? Where im from it's only legal to play Tournaments but not cashgames.
30:29 However, I assume at high level of HU SnG the game is more difficult so the ROI will decrease, so the ROI and buy-in levels affects each other. How can we still use this formula?
You can adjust your edge to reflect the tougher games. The explanation for how to do this is shown at 31:16
For a HU SnG you can simplify to this formula
f* = ROI%
For example, if your edge at the higher stakes is 2% you'd risk no more 2% of your bankroll per match.
Thoughts on cashgames vs tournaments at low stakes? Gone from $25-110-15-60 in the last few weeks, ~6.5k hands played.
Went from 110-15 by going on a losing streak, losing often in "flips" where I had 70-80% equity, almost always in tournaments.
Went from 15-60 yesterday, $10 from cashgames, $35 profit from tournaments, total buyins of $18.
My issue is, it's hard to multi table since I live in Ontario, so my player pool is very limited on PokerStars.
Tournaments seem to require a string of luck, but I am capable of normally atleast mincashing 200-600 fields(if I'm not playing to win, which is how I always lose "big"), and I often place well in $1-$3 50-80 player tournaments.
10 all ins pre flop with AA KK loose 10 should i play this?
Amazing content, as always!
Regarding Kelly Criterion and online players, do we input rakeback in our win rate since it adds to our bankroll. And thanks for this video.
Yes, enter your final win rate after rakeback and bonuses
Amazing video, thank you very much
Awesome video yet again!
Great vid well laid out.
How about i just do playing not having a bankroll but i just do play once twice in a week that depends on my salary. i just limit it to 1/10 of my salary. if i run good i target it to make it x5 of it then i stop this is in CG. if run bad then its over for the month. in MTT i just make an allotment to two table buy in once in a week.
Very nice content !
Beautiful,thank you!
Part of the problem is that risk is not stable or predictable so to use a kelly type system isnt really
viable s well as the fact that the unit is not infinitely divisible.
That's a fair criticism. I find that Kelly still works despite stakes being discrete, as there's still an aspect of reinvestment and compounding returns. However it's not perfect. The risk being unstable is a big part of the reason that people recommend half-kelly or quarter-kelly strategies.
Agreed @@GTOWizard
Is black jack luck or skill if you count cards?
It doesn't matter how many hands per hour you play? For example in live poker its gonna be around 25hands/hour, online it could be 400 hands/hour. But you can play higher limits in live than online. What's best then? Isn't best to take $/hour instead of bb/100 ($/100)?
Both are valid. $/hr is better for live games, bb/100 is better for online. Either measurement works so long as you correctly adjust the winrate and variance.
I really loved this video! It helped me put my current downswing (15 BI) in a context and make me feel less stupid.
Just a question: I am a micro player and at 5NL I have an insane 350 BB/100 standard dev (200 at 2NL), but I don't play as a maniac (I am a 21/16/5 player), I just think I sometimes have value bet like God and sometimes been megacoolered/owned like a donk lol. Do you think I can afford to underestimate my standard dev when I am Kelly calculating for moving up or is it better to stick with it? Thank you :)
Hey, this might be useful info for you it helped me. Drop the word cooler, it's not useful, a bet that cannot be called by worse is a bluff. Secondly 21/16 is quite a large gap which would say you are likely flatting on the button good reason and also flatting all pairs in all seats. I'd be interested to hear
Are you sure you calculated your standard deviation correctly? That seems way too high. Maybe it's a sample size issue or maybe you've filtered for e.g. only 3bet pots.
@@GTOWizard I took it straight from PT4 without any filters, but I will double check maybe. Sample sizes for NL2 and NL5 are 70k and 40k respectively. Thanks!
Hi this is Alice, I think you can message me your contact details and I will send you a text message and we can discuss it with the team analysts
@@GTOWizard I tried hand calculating a small sample of 7k hands and the result is 58bb/100! PT4 tells me 360bb/100. There might be a bug or I cannot calculate it properly :/
I someone who grinded zoom for glorified loot boxes, I can confirm these variance numbers firsthand 😂
Nice timestamps! 🙂
Please keep using them!
@GTOwizard How do I estimate my SDV for live? I track my results and it says BB/hour SDV is 80bb. I play on average 25 hands an hour. Would this therefore mean I just multiply by 4 so 320bb/100 SDV?
Great question! Standard deviation scales with the square root of the number of samples.
If your standard deviation is 80bb per 25 hands, then your standard deviation per 100 hands is:
80 x sqrt(hands/25) = 80 x sqrt (100/25) = 160 bb/100
See the margin of error calculation in this article: blog.gtowizard.com/variance-and-bankroll-management/
@@GTOWizard ah shoot I think the maths in the tracker is wrong lol. For my 100hand sessions 50% of my results are outside Mu +\- 1.96*40 instead of 5%. Do you know what it is likely to actually be for live poker at 10/20/40 (I always input the game as 20/40 and buying 100bb deep 4k, rake is 3bb/100)? Trying to optimise my BR some more as I'm not sure if I can play the game or not ( btw this video was amazing)
Amazing content!! GG 👍🙂
nice .. ty .. but..1st u should explain stats & diferencies beetwen them like bb/100 & ev bb /100
in variance calculator i believe ev bb is the correct stat to use
also .. size of bankroll & life style = what is most important for how variance effects life experience
What is / how do you calculate Standard Deviation????
Read this article to learn more about what is and how to calculate standard deviation! blog.gtowizard.com/variance-and-bankroll-management/
I cant find the risk of ruin calculator, Anyone can help me!?????
Unfortunately it looks like the site is down. You can use primedope to figure out the minimum bankroll for a 5% RoR.
The general formula for risk of ruin in poker looks like this:
RoR = (1 - wr/sd)^(br/sd) * (1 + wr/sd)^(-br/sd)
Where:
RoR = Risk of Ruin, probability of busting if you never change stakes
wr = win rate in dollars per hundred hands
sd = standard deviation in dollars per hundred hands
br = bankroll in dollars
amazing, thank you very much
My local casino - the 1/2 is $500 max buy in.... So at 35 buy ins you're saying a min of a $17,500 bank roll ? The 2/5 is $1500 max buy in, so that's $52,500 min bank roll? I just don't see how that's a feasible expectation in pretty much in any room in any casino. I'm not debating the math, just the reality.
You failed to calculate that if you have, lets say, a 5k BR for playing NL200, you actually don't have 25 buy-ins! You actually have much more: if you move down every time you lose 5 buy ins, you actually have 5buy-ins*(number of stakes until you cannot move down) + number of buy-ins left at the lowest stake.
So in this case with a 5k BR (assuming a NL200->NL100->NL50->NL25->NL10->NL5->NL2 progression) you have 5*6=30 buyins +:
20buy-ins at NL200=40 buyins at NL100
35 buyins at NL100=70 buyins at NL50
65 buyins at NL50=130 buyins at NL25
125buyins at NL25=312,5 buyins at NL10
307,5 buyins at NL10=615 buyins at NL5
610 buyins at NL5=1525 buyins at NL2
5k BR at NL200=1555 buyins! That is completely insane.
You are advocating for a BR strategy that is beyond ultra-conservative, and that will keep most players stuck in low stakes and demotivated.
Are you referring to the last chapter? The bankroll requirements are calculated in dollars, not buy-ins.
Beautiful Game
49 point what!!
Poker is luck primarily.
The skill part is something you see Esfandiari do, by taking on mentally weak people and exploiting them. Some do it more obvious, other are more subtile (like Negreanu).
Playing Online, with Rake involved, you need a edge greater than the rake(mathematically speaking).
So winning 53% of your flips wouldnt cut it on a site like GG.
And that deviation is already hard to achieve, even if you are an overperformer.
If you can buy in for 1000 BB, that would not matter, because skill prevails when stacked this deep, there are also Rake benefits since the limit is designed for 100BB buy ins.
This is the mainproblem and why, compared to live, only 5% of the playerbase can make money out of poker, and i assure you, they are only there because they were luckier than their pro-bretheren.
Actually I think you may have the concept of Gambler's Fallacy a bit skewed. The point that the example gives is that regardless of the perceived probabilities, there is no guarantee those probabilities will come true. No matter the sample size. In fact, the possibilities substantially out weigh the probabilities. So despite all the wonderous BS that solvers come up with, a good, strong exploitative strategy should be more reliable. No?
People have a tough time understanding the Gambler's Fallacy. My point here 6:55 is that coins and cards don't have memory.
The expected value is to never catch up. If you start with a 6-point lead, on average, you will retain a 6-point lead. However, thanks the law of large numbers, after thousands of flips the proportion of heads and tails gets closer to 50%/50% just because that 6 point lead is tiny in comparison to thousands of flips.
Similarly, if you run poorly in poker, there is no Karma that says you should run well later. The deck has no memory. You are just as likely to get coolered the next hand as you were the previous hand. However, in the long run, your edge will make this runbad variance look smaller and smaller in comparison.
Now all of that said, none of this has anything to do with GTO or Exploitative ideas. None of this has anything to do with Solvers. It's just describing the nature of variance.
@GTOWizard yeah my variance usually has more to do with getting impatient after getting some bad hand like most people I guess. My God runs are getting longer, tilts more avoidable. lol
Thorough
Please do not provide multiple choice questions where the correct answer does not correspond to one of the choices.
CONFIDENCE is the KEY😂😂😂
Everyone brings up the gamblers fallacy to make a point, but always leave out the other probability question; what's the chance of flipping the same side 7 times in a row. Yes the probabiliy of the next flip is 50/50 but there's also the probability of streaks.
It's the other side of the same question. Chances of flipping 7 heads in a row is low (0.5^7), but chances of flipping heads a 7th time AFTER you've already flipped 6 heads is 50-50.
@@GTOWizard Interesting philosophical question then, no? The short of it (as poker advice) you play the odds of the hand, not the streak, but the mystical side of it is, well, play the streak. Let's not put aside the other important adage of poker; you cant beat luck. Play your streak, but as is the point, streaks end and the hard part is knowing when that is.
J4
My risk of ruin is 100% when I play poker 😂
Money management is the most important not skills. Don't move up. Your win rate is higher at your current stake. lol
I think that gamblers fallacy is misleading to a certain extent.
If I go in to a bet where there are 10 coin flips... no more, no less..... and 9 times the coin hits heads...... There is a higher chance that the coin will hit tails on the 10th flip.
Or I guess I should say there is a lower chance that it will hit heads again.
There are equations for this. "What are the odds that heads will come up 10/10 flips"... the answer is the odds are low.... and there would not be an answer if the gambers fallacy was 100% accurate. The gamblers fallacy is assuming you're not playing a limited set of flips.... but you ARE.
This seeming contradiction has never been adequately explained to me.
Ask yourself this. How does the coin remember the last 9 flips? How would the coin physically change it's properties to make the next flip more or less likely to be heads? What would happen if you whisper lies to the coin about the previous results?
The probability that your next 10 flips are heads is very low. The probability that the very next flip is heads, given that you've already flipped it 9 times, is 50%.
@@GTOWizard According to probability, there is a 1/1024 chance of getting 10 consecutive heads (in a run of 10 flips in a row).
This is according to wikipedia. And this is during an infinite amount of flips... I'm talking about 10 flips ONLY. If this is the case, and you only have 10 flips (remember you only have 10 flips)... and 9 of them have been heads already you have 50% chance to hit a 1/1024 occurance. (And yes I understand that the odds go down each time the coin turns up heads so by the time it hit's heads the ninth time it's around 50%).
But that doesn't make sense. I mean it does... but it doesn't. I understand the logic behind the math.... on how it's supposed to be 50% but I swear to god I cannot reconcile this with the fact that ur only making 10 flips, and not infinity flips.
If I martingaled a coin flip for 100k flips... would I end up even?
I tell you what it is variance , for most is an alien, but rreally is the ALIEN of movie and you need to be a Predator ahah
How much do I put in my life roll per win nigga?
I’ve been playing poker for years and I’m pretty sure that this game ain’t about skills.. its all freaking luck!
just tell me how many buyins Im supposed to have! jesus!
Title should be: how to explain(incorrectly) the gambler’s fallacy with only a surface level understanding and no teaching training.
Gto is obsolete. Bto ia the new wave!
What is Bto？😮
Bto?
@@quoddie hahaha forgot what the joke was....
I try GTOWizard for free for around a month, and woow ! This is very good, help a lot.. I just upgrated to premiun, and really not regret it. I doubt myself a lot when i play, and with this i can quickly see if i made a mistake or not ( after the session of course), and now whatever the outcome, i am only satisfied if i made the correct decision. Awesome tool!! Thanks
on ggpoker they babysit people on the river when u are against a losing player
Bullshit