]]>
But...
luck IS a constant...and it DOES vary...one could say it's a constant variable...luck plays a big factor, but does APPROACH zero...but never gets there...you're both right...sort of... over anyone's lifetime, skill will approach maybe 99%, and luck will approach maybe 1%...that's over a long lifetime...maybe Doyle's.
I realize this may be a tongue in cheek post, but if it is not entirely, spend more time fine tuning your game and forget the theory.
Now MY head hurts.
Statistics: Posted by WildBillHickok — Fri Aug 12, 2005 9:56 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
]]>
OK I am saying that luck is a constant. That it is always there. That it will always affect you and that theoretically it could be measured. However, while it is a constant, that constant is determined by your opponents. Such as was in my example, if 1 player had an ROI of 0% then the total ROI would be 270 and each player would have .27reduction in their ROI for a luck constant. I know that seems variable, but it is a constant dependant on the inputs. Such like a freezing point. They vary with the type of fluid, but the freezing point for each liquid is a constant.
How about the rest of the post, any merit, contradictions, outright errors.
Statistics: Posted by RyanLM — Wed Aug 10, 2005 1:26 pm
]]>
]]>
I am open to thinking that luck is variable, but I am going to take a lot of convincing since thinking about it, and partly cause i'm thick headed.
Statistics: Posted by RyanLM — Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:56 pm
]]>
]]>
Tournament play.
Givens:
I am playing a 10 seated SNG.
I am all 10 players.
I have a ROI of 30%
That means that all the players have a 30% EV from their buyin.
10*30% = 300% which in turn is 3 buyins.
I am proposing that the excess of the EV buyins above the total of all buyins, is the luck factor for the game. This means that in my setup, luck factor is reducing the total EV for everyone by 3 buyins. So, each player's EV is reduced by the average luck factor present in the tourney. In the example, each is reduced by .3 and therefore, everyone has an expected value of 1 buyin from the game. This is not rocket science as everyone has the same ROI they are just going to trade money, this is intuitive.
I propose that luck is a constant. It is a factor to be applied to each game, and will reduce/increase the amount of your ROI in each game. I am sayign that luck is sometihng that can be calculated and is dependant upon the expectations of each player in the game.
However, I think that over a long period of time, luck is reduced to nil. But how can a constant go to zero over a time period. It can't!
So I thought that maybe luck is a constant and does not go to zero over a lifetime. I propose that it is always goign to affect your outcome, and the only thing that affects your results are the expectations of the otehr playrs in the game.
Now if we change the expected ROI of each player in the game, how does this impact our luck constant, and how does it impact our ROI?
How does all this apply to MTTs.
I have done more thinking into this, but I am looking for some discussion, and some different angles of thought before I go any farther.
Statistics: Posted by RyanLM — Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:19 pm
]]>