run it twice?

Originally posted by Rihard4a
Facts the you state are the so called delusions.

Okay do a mathematical calculation on flipping a coin, do you think that if you RIT on a coin flip, it will reduce the variance either hitting A or B? ♠_biggrin:

If you RIT the coin it either means you flip it twice which means the result is more likely to be 50/50 which it is supposed to be in the long run. OR do you think that if you'd flip the coin 10000000000000 times it won't be 50/50 because it's random?

Or if you RIT it without letting the same outcome hit twice (like in poker, not putting back cards that already been deal) it ends up exactly 50/50 which is exactly expectation you had before the flip. SO idk wtf you're talking about

Originally posted by Rihard4a
Facts the you state are the so called delusions.

Okay do a mathematical calculation on flipping a coin, do you think that if you RIT on a coin flip, it will reduce the variance either hitting A or B? ♠_biggrin:

oh my god, can someone help me here please?
wtf the coin flip has to do with running it twice? dude I never said RIT changes the odds, it just reduces the swings, you will lose longterm if you keep getting it in with 49% equity whether you run it once or twice or 100 times on each hand, the standard deviation will just be smaller.

♠_biggrin:

Funny thread to read.

what have i done?

Originally posted by muel294
what have i done?

RUN

the thing about "subjective" factors is, uh, far too subjective to me on mathematical factors, in the long run it shouldn't matter anyway... in the short run seems to me like a good way to keep your green line closer to the EV line

I looked at two cases. Firstly, all in on the turn with N outs, and secondly, all in on the flop with N outs. I expected that in each case the EV of running it twice would be slightly different to running it once. In each case it was exactly the same. In the second case, the algebra was bad enough that I had to get my computer to do it for me. This suggests two things. Firstly, running it twice does not affect EV (it obviously reduces variance), and secondly, I'm crap at combinatorics - if the EV is the same, there should be a simple argument for why, not pages and pages of algebra.

The only rational reason to RIT is to keep your opponent happy. If you RIT to reduce your own variance, then you play too high. If, on the other hand, your opponent wants to RIT (to reduce his variance), then, by all means, do so. It doesn't cost you a thing in terms of EV. He is the one playing in the wrong game, and you'd like him to stay.

/Johan =

Originally posted by YohanN7
The only rational reason to RIT is to keep your opponent happy. If you RIT to reduce your own variance, then you play too high. If, on the other hand, your opponent wants to RIT (to reduce his variance), then, by all means, do so. It doesn't cost you a thing in terms of EV. He is the one playing in the wrong game, and you'd like him to stay.

/Johan =

RIT reduces variance for both sides.

Originally posted by booomm

Originally posted by YohanN7
The only rational reason to RIT is to keep your opponent happy. If you RIT to reduce your own variance, then you play too high. If, on the other hand, your opponent wants to RIT (to reduce his variance), then, by all means, do so. It doesn't cost you a thing in terms of EV. He is the one playing in the wrong game, and you'd like him to stay.

/Johan =

RIT reduces variance for both sides.

Yes, but if variance matters to you, then you play too high.

/Johan =

Originally posted by YohanN7

Originally posted by booomm

Originally posted by YohanN7
The only rational reason to RIT is to keep your opponent happy. If you RIT to reduce your own variance, then you play too high. If, on the other hand, your opponent wants to RIT (to reduce his variance), then, by all means, do so. It doesn't cost you a thing in terms of EV. He is the one playing in the wrong game, and you'd like him to stay.

/Johan =

RIT reduces variance for both sides.

Yes, but if variance matters to you, then you play too high.

/Johan =

ah I see what you mean now

Couldn't you equally interpret it as, 'if you use RIT, you can play higher'? Personally, since imo so little of the variance is in all in pots, I would hesitate to use RIT as a reason to play higher.

Originally posted by jbpatzer
Couldn't you equally interpret it as, 'if you use RIT, you can play higher'? Personally, since imo so little of the variance is in all in pots, I would hesitate to use RIT as a reason to play higher.

I suppose you could, but don't go from 1/2 to 2/4 and expect RIT to even out all variance. But say (hypothetically) 2/4 requires a BR of 10000. Then you might play it (with sound BR management) with a BR of only 9800 - or something like that if you use RIT.

Another obvious exception: If you win a freeroll to win a $100 000 000 entry to the highest game in the world, then a RIT might be the right thing to do.

/Johan =