Comments on: Summer Vacation + something to think about http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/ by Andrew C. Prock Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:50:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Chipp http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-893 Chipp Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:02:07 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-893 Doh...of course that should be Sharp<b>e</b> Ratio. Doh…of course that should be Sharpe Ratio.

]]> By: Chipp http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-824 Chipp Sat, 19 Aug 2006 01:42:47 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-824 <i>That could mean poker is merely a guessing game that predominantly involves luck. </i> Umm well, it is. Take a look at the components of your Sharp Ratio (ev/SD). <i>*shudder* I don’t believe that</i> Well, that's typical. Embrace it my friend, the next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing. Beats working anyway. That could mean poker is merely a guessing game that predominantly involves luck.

Umm well, it is. Take a look at the components of your Sharp Ratio (ev/SD).

*shudder* I don’t believe that

Well, that’s typical.

Embrace it my friend, the next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing. Beats working anyway.

]]> By: David http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-822 David Fri, 18 Aug 2006 20:08:31 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-822 Matros writes about something like this occasionally. There are situations in which, if you bet and are raised, you know that you are beat, and you lose $X, whereas, if you check and are bet into, you introduce the possibility that your opponent is bluffing, meaning if you call, you lose Matros writes about something like this occasionally. There are situations in which, if you bet and are raised, you know that you are beat, and you lose $X, whereas, if you check and are bet into, you introduce the possibility that your opponent is bluffing, meaning if you call, you lose

]]> By: Gary Carson http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-802 Gary Carson Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:42:38 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-802 I don't get it either. The standard response is that more information can't hurt because you can always ignore it. That's what Skalnsky would say. Of course it's not true, because you can't really ignore information once you have it you'll use it. I can think of one situation where knowing more of the information that doesn't matter much while not knowing the information that does matter hurts you. If an unknown UTG limper is followed by a wild and crazy raise, knowing the exact distribution of the hands the raiser might hold while not knowing anything about the UTG limper could be a bad thing. That's because you already know all you really need to know with the wild/crazy informaiton, and what really matters is whether the UTG limper only limps with AA. Or something like that. But I'm just guessing, I don't really know what you mean. I don’t get it either. The standard response is that more information can’t hurt because you can always ignore it. That’s what Skalnsky would say. Of course it’s not true, because you can’t really ignore information once you have it you’ll use it.

I can think of one situation where knowing more of the information that doesn’t matter much while not knowing the information that does matter hurts you.

If an unknown UTG limper is followed by a wild and crazy raise, knowing the exact distribution of the hands the raiser might hold while not knowing anything about the UTG limper could be a bad thing. That’s because you already know all you really need to know with the wild/crazy informaiton, and what really matters is whether the UTG limper only limps with AA.

Or something like that.

But I’m just guessing, I don’t really know what you mean.

]]> By: DP http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-797 DP Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:52:21 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-797 That could mean poker is merely a guessing game that predominantly involves luck. *shudder* I don't believe that, but through deduction I believe that such a point could be construed from what you're saying. That could mean poker is merely a guessing game that predominantly involves luck. *shudder* I don’t believe that, but through deduction I believe that such a point could be construed from what you’re saying.

]]> By: Daniel Stutzbach http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-795 Daniel Stutzbach Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:28:26 +0000 http://www.headsupclub.com/aprock/2006/08/summer-vacation/#comment-795 The only cases I can think of where it is correct to choose less information are circumstances where you have to pay for the information, either directly (more bets) or indirectly (by revealing more information to your opponents in the process). There are many cases where the +EV of the additional information does not cover the -EV of the cost to get the information. Is that what you mean? Or are you thinking of some case where the extra information actually hurts you? If so, can you give an example? The only cases I can think of where it is correct to choose less information are circumstances where you have to pay for the information, either directly (more bets) or indirectly (by revealing more information to your opponents in the process). There are many cases where the +EV of the additional information does not cover the -EV of the cost to get the information.

Is that what you mean? Or are you thinking of some case where the extra information actually hurts you? If so, can you give an example?

]]>