I am due for luck

[sagefr0g]

Originally Posted by Dopple

...
I think it is hard to not have that mindset after a losing streak that your good days will be coming soon.
..

yeah, i have that tendency of thinking ( i think it's called the gambler fallacy) and i'm even worse after a winning streak, fearing a losing streak to follow, lol.

what ever i guess there isn't anything to say good days won't come after a crap losing streak.

[StandardDeviant]

Originally Posted by Jack_Black

I think you also are looking at SD as something that is “due” for you. You're EV is due for you, variance is just what comes along with the territory. So after a billion hands, your EV will be given to you. During your time playing a billion hands, you will see negative variance and positive variance.

This is not how it works. We've been through this before. Expected value does not mean guaranteed value. If you want that, buy life insurance.

[Cardcounter]

If you are the favorite you are do for luck if you are the unerdog you are not do for luck.

[Jack_Black]

Originally Posted by StandardDeviant

This is not how it works. We've been through this before. Expected value does not mean guaranteed value. If you want that, buy life insurance.

You must have me confused with another handsome, rugged, brilliant AP. we have not been through this before. Would you care to elaborate on how EV is not guaranteed? and if you're referring to not playing optimally, incorrectly, etc, or playing with a high ROR, then I already knew that. Or if you mean that if EV is a specific dollar value, you will not literally see that dollar value.

Originally Posted by ExhibitCAA

If you experience repeated "bad variance," then it means you are not playing with the edge you think you have.

I agree to a point, but what about for those on this forum that constantly post about their 6 month losing streak, and that it is natural in this game? Those posters being highly regarded players?

[ExhibitCAA]

Anyone who has a 6-month losing streak would not be a "highly regarded" player in my book. A 6-month losing streak indicates a very weak overall game, possibly negative.

I would never do what I do if 6-month losing streaks were possible. It is rare to have a "hole" last more than a week. It is rare to have a losing trip (where a trip typically lasts 3-7 days). I should probably say, "extremely rare." Whenever I do have an irritating loss (basically any loss), I usually run more numbers to try to boost my edge for next time, but we're getting pretty far off topic now.

[johndoe]

CAA, you're right, but you also aren't "just counting" (or sometimes counting at all). For pure counters, these kinds of losses are inevitable from time to time (though six months is pushing it!)

I think it's important to distinguish this, otherwise people will have unrealistic expectations about card counting.

[Jack_Black]

Originally Posted by ExhibitCAA

Anyone who has a 6-month losing streak would not be a "highly regarded" player in my book.

John Doe, just what I was going to say. I would think that it would still be typical of someone playing with a regular card counter's edge, not a CAA edge.

[iCountNTrack]

Originally Posted by Jack_Black

John Doe, just what I was going to say. I would think that it would still be typical of someone playing with a regular card counter's edge, not a CAA edge.

You have to look at the strength of your counting game. If card counting is your sole AP technique, any game (house rules, penetration, playing strategy, betting strategy) with an N0 (accumulated expectations is equal to accumulated 1 standard deviation) that is greater than 12000 hands is really a waste of time.

But back to the 6 months losing streak, if you are racking up 2000 hands a week , 6 months is 26 weeks, 26 * 2000 = 52000 hands, which is greater than the number of hands needed to accumulate enough expectation to overcome 2 standard deviations (48000 hands or N1)

[Kasi]

Originally Posted by Dopple

.. is that is all periods to which a standard deviation can defined are independent of each other so if I play 100 hours and come out at 1sd below my EV why would I not then again have the same likelyhood of once again being 1sd below my EV. ...

Exactly. You got it. Every 100 hr period of play will have the same liklihood that range of results will fall within 1sd above or below EV. Such lilihood being 68%ish.

Like CAA says lol.

It's like take Jack Blacks 1BB hands. That's 100,000 separate 100 hr periods. (If it's not say that it is lol.) 68% (68000 of the 100000 100 hr sessions) of the time results will be within 1sd of SD. Maybe not exactly,of course. But probably pretty close.

[Kasi]

Originally Posted by Cardcounter

If you are the favorite you are do for luck if you are the unerdog you are not do for luck.

Whether you are the favorite or not, a +EV guy or a -EV guy, each guy will have his results be within 1 sd of expected after the same period of time

It's just that the +EV guy, over time, when experiencing 1sd of bad luck might still be ahead of where he started. And the -EV guy might not even be ahead from where he started with 1 sd of good luck.

But their luck has been equal - both are within 1 sd of expected.