tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.comments2017-04-29T06:28:56.301-07:00Quantitative PokerMike Steinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-19705831133199089932014-03-29T08:49:15.698-07:002014-03-29T08:49:15.698-07:00Heard the interview - good stuff.
You should take ...Heard the interview - good stuff.<br />You should take a math class.<br />;)RancherRonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14530234667393718125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-24015411368048487172013-12-05T22:54:12.290-08:002013-12-05T22:54:12.290-08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16785251024554241612noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-36079249545736688042013-02-15T20:01:56.796-08:002013-02-15T20:01:56.796-08:00Point well-noted on the uphill battle given that i...Point well-noted on the uphill battle given that internet poker is being pitched mainly on its tax revenue, and that the inertia of the status quo favors the rules which ostensibly give "higher revenue"... higher revenue, at least for the time until enough customers become price-sensitive. It's hard to be optimistic about.<br /><br />Allowing netting is a fine (equivalent, right?) way to pose the solution, and perhaps does have less of a potentially-ridiculous feel to it. I was thinking that clarifying session length might be simpler because it doesn't involve revising an existing rule, but merely adding a new clarification to it. You've got the better perspective than I on these matters for sure. Thanks for the correction on the AMT, I had been under the impression that phantom poker income couldn't trigger the AGI but could increase the tax liability if triggered otherwise. Really appreciate your feedback, thanks Russ.Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-53828508635100167122013-02-15T14:29:06.189-08:002013-02-15T14:29:06.189-08:00I'm not holding my breath for this to happen. ...I'm not holding my breath for this to happen. Given that the current tax rules for gambling increase revenues (to the government) and the government is desperately seeking ca$h, nothing will change. <br /><br />That said, the idea that a Gambling Session is the entire year is ridiculous. A better change is to allow gamblers to net their wins and losses and report solely the net number on their returns.<br /><br />Finally, point 7 in your list of AMT items is not likely. One of the few deductions available in AMT is gambling losses, so if someone is impacted by AMT, generally the gambling activity will not have an impact on the amount of AMT.Russ Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07933608424060861369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-49730755522235799592013-02-15T13:11:41.947-08:002013-02-15T13:11:41.947-08:00I agree, that's another excellent benefit of t...I agree, that's another excellent benefit of tax reform. I would not be shocked to learn that some amateurs once had intentions to file but balked upon learning about what can go wrong. Thanks for adding that, Curtis.Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-52761202821716464252013-02-15T13:06:02.090-08:002013-02-15T13:06:02.090-08:00Well stated Mike. Fixing this inequity would likel...Well stated Mike. Fixing this inequity would likely result in greater returns for the IRS as well, as many an amateur player is simply not reporting at all under present guidelines. A more reasonable and streamlined method would likely find more players actually reporting.curtinseahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08087154547236691148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-72056632341266413862012-11-17T17:38:32.381-08:002012-11-17T17:38:32.381-08:00You are a godYou are a godΑΝΤΙ-ΟΠΑΠhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07800150596550552766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-5055581967490252372012-10-01T10:30:50.240-07:002012-10-01T10:30:50.240-07:00Nice! Definitely jealous.Nice! Definitely jealous.Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-71294866905735789952012-10-01T09:19:57.659-07:002012-10-01T09:19:57.659-07:00This is the first post of yours that I've read...This is the first post of yours that I've read, Mike. This is awesome! Gotta love that Richard Garfield. Does it make you jealous that I have an edited 30 point damage lightening bolt signed by him?<br /><br />ReidReid Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06736691349171904604noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-57207996554982002782012-09-19T18:57:18.832-07:002012-09-19T18:57:18.832-07:00Hey man keep up the good work. I'm enjoying th...Hey man keep up the good work. I'm enjoying the blog!<br /><br />David @TransformpokerDmidd87https://www.blogger.com/profile/14637652970443200720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-12581349457485221372012-09-11T12:00:21.962-07:002012-09-11T12:00:21.962-07:00that one nails it!that one nails it!curtinseahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08087154547236691148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-4193019013120552442012-09-10T17:29:59.905-07:002012-09-10T17:29:59.905-07:00I'm enjoying the series. Looking forward to th...I'm enjoying the series. Looking forward to the rest!Axmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15441011202002595218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-2358526153025038792012-09-10T16:58:51.285-07:002012-09-10T16:58:51.285-07:00Bingo!Bingo!TAMiller866https://www.blogger.com/profile/13551605258873677866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-72612574560599287542012-09-07T19:41:41.377-07:002012-09-07T19:41:41.377-07:00Nobody has ever accused me of being too succinct o...Nobody has ever accused me of being too succinct on this blog ;)Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-2177462466063596892012-09-07T19:37:54.210-07:002012-09-07T19:37:54.210-07:00Wow, that was a lot of words, big words, to say &q...Wow, that was a lot of words, big words, to say "the edge of one skilled player over a similarly skilled player is negligible, while the edge of one skilled player over an unskilled player is vast" :)<br /><br />But what an important point that must be made in the argument of skill vs chance. <br /><br />Great post!curtinseahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08087154547236691148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-61759761711609392182012-05-22T18:46:17.789-07:002012-05-22T18:46:17.789-07:00Hi Jerrod!
Very true, one would always be better ...Hi Jerrod!<br /><br />Very true, one would always be better off swapping some percentage of one's recommended equity through this model rather than taking it all themselves. That would be a good next step in this sort of approach, though it's probably computationally annoying... one shortcut would come from the fact that the Sharpe-optimizing swap percentages are independent of scale, i.e. they'd be the same if you were taking all $10,000 of the action of the pooled players or if you were to sell off any percentage of that portfolio. So, if the pool of available players to possibly swap with or buy from is fixed, first calculate the optimal percentage-swapping arrangement, then approximate a payoff distribution for that player portfolio (which will be of a lower variance than the single player's finish distribution built here) and run this sort of approach on the result.Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-40688209163491427192012-05-22T18:10:24.039-07:002012-05-22T18:10:24.039-07:00^^ is jankenman, no patience to figure out how to ...^^ is jankenman, no patience to figure out how to make my name appear.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08759681764400389264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-24452893093836573412012-05-22T18:08:51.058-07:002012-05-22T18:08:51.058-07:00You might also want to consider the utility-positi...You might also want to consider the utility-positive effects of swapping or buying pieces of other players in lieu of taking more of yourself. In most cases, where you say things like "take all your own action," a more utility-maximizing thing to do is to continue to sell pieces of yourself while buying appropriately sized pieces of others, even others who have smaller EV than you (we discussed this briefly in our book).Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08759681764400389264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-36199882117357552592011-11-23T21:37:32.505-08:002011-11-23T21:37:32.505-08:00Bellatrix, great to hear from you!
Indeed, the se...Bellatrix, great to hear from you!<br /><br />Indeed, the second method here uses a similar model as the Theory of Doubling Up. I realized that it becomes a smooth distribution when looking at it as doubling chips instead of beating a heads-up opponent, but I wasn't sure how it would generalize beyond that when going from a heads-up tournament structure to a multiplayer structure. Notably, you will no longer be facing a single opponent with the same initial starting stack as you, as you would in a heads-up tournament. If you win a heads-up match against a field of uniform opponents with probability 0.6, you may not win a 4-handed shootout against the same opponents with probability exactly 0.36.<br /><br />For the matters of what I wanted to build here, which was a easy way of adapting a ROI or tournament win probability to a full tournament finish probability distribution, the Theory of Doubling Up approach seemed less than ideal because, surprisingly, when N is not a power of 2 and logs have to be used rather than binomial probabilities, the distributions looked very different based on whether you started with p_1 or started with p_N. To put it another way, it gave different finish distribution results from knowing that you'd win a 10-person tournament with probability 0.6 ^ log_2(N) than it gave from knowing that you'd lose the same tournament with probability 0.4 ^ log_2(N); if the tournament were a heads-up tournament against uniform opponents, <br /><br />You raise an interesting point with the observation that Malmuth Harville is more accurate later in a tournament. I haven't fully considered the implications, but they may be different than what I'm trying to build here. It may be the case that, in practice, the Theory of Doubling Up is a better model early on to value actual tournament chip stacks, and that Malmuth Harville is better later. But buildling a finish probability distribution is different than trying to find a way to value all chip stacks. It may even be a sub-problem of the chip stack valuation problem. With that in mind, any method that produces a finish probability distribution with desirable properties should be good. In particular, what I'm building here is something that should work independently of prize structure, which is of course a crucial component of chip stack evaluation problems.<br /><br />Thanks for the idea, I definitely need to think about the implications more. And I'm long overdue for a reread of Chen/Ankenman.<br /><br />Yours sounds like an interesting article idea, a utility-based approach seems to be a good way to approach that sort of question. It would certainly be a fun problem to play around with, I look forward to reading it if you find the time! Final tabling a Main Event once ever 2 lifetimes seems about right... if everyone were equally skilled, playing a 6,000-person field 60 times would only yield at least one final table with probability 9/6000*60 = 0.09, right? You'd have to be 10x more likely than average to make the final table before your mean number of tournaments would be down to 60ish, which seems plausible for an expert.Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-63706775610731540322011-11-22T22:21:10.128-08:002011-11-22T22:21:10.128-08:00Tournament has bigger luck factor than cash games,...Tournament has bigger luck factor than cash games, is a higher variance game. I mean Jamie Gold manage to win wsop, thats the proof ;p .Cash game brings Justiceblueb0xhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12005377127940818668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-52534097737738057182011-11-22T09:44:57.259-08:002011-11-22T09:44:57.259-08:00I just read this now after reading your bubble pos...I just read this now after reading your bubble post on pokerfuse.<br /><br /> I must say that your second method approximates "The Theory of Doubling Up" describes in the "Mathematics of poker". So as long as you don't see it as you moving up half the spots, but the chips actually doubling, this distribution becomes smooth. Skill can be accounted for by that doublin-up probability, you have an edge if is larger than 0.5.<br /><br />ICM, ie Malmuth Harville is only important in the later stages of the tournament, imo, so it would be computationally prudent to not include them until the bubble has burst.<br /><br />I've been meaning to do a similar blog post on this, truly evaluating the ICM of the Nov 9, ie the question - when would you NOT take 2nd 3rd, 4th place money assuming a premium on 1st for sponshorship, etc. I also heard on a podcast that Devo says you make a Main event final table every 2 lifetimes, assuming you are skilled and play 30 Main Events over your lifetime. :) Maybe some weekend haha.<br /><br />Cheers and keep up the good workbellatrix78https://www.blogger.com/profile/17286560853976919039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-35316506167304819652011-09-08T19:38:34.098-07:002011-09-08T19:38:34.098-07:00You are an epic man sir
I wish you win wsop main ...You are an epic man sir<br /><br />I wish you win wsop main event one dayΑΝΤΙ-ΟΠΑΠhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07800150596550552766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-75247642344298422792011-09-08T13:23:35.767-07:002011-09-08T13:23:35.767-07:00Thanks! It is very reassuring to know that this o...Thanks! It is very reassuring to know that this one makes sense to at least one other human out there ;)Mike Steinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04085932960610615123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-32371862895738632322011-09-08T10:39:25.904-07:002011-09-08T10:39:25.904-07:00Do i have to be proud to be the first one to tell ...Do i have to be proud to be the first one to tell you that you that this post is epic??? Keep it coming sir, you have at least one internation super fanΑΝΤΙ-ΟΠΑΠhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07800150596550552766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1690550055620514587.post-39519921635566272112011-07-25T21:51:13.026-07:002011-07-25T21:51:13.026-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.jonwilsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03075327655493373834noreply@blogger.com