Friends, I have simulated several sims with 20 billion rounds to be able to see what the index is for an 88 v T, there is not much difference but the one that stands out the most due to the SCORE is -4, I don't know if the difference is just a margin of error but these are the results:
Captura de pantalla 2024-02-10 123320.jpg
SIM: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1a_j...ew?usp=sharing
Sincerely,
Anthony Davalos
Perfect! If "-4" is the index with which you get the best SCORE, it means it's also risk-averse.Originally Posted by Softhony
I had calculated "-3", so I assume it should be correct as an EV-maximizer. Something you can check is the following:
See what IBA (flat bet) you get with "-3" and with "-4". The one with the better EV will be the EV-maximizer.
Hope this helps.
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
Thanks Cac for the recommendation. I placed the flat bet at $100 to be able to see the profit per hour since I couldn't find a difference in the EV and I obtained the following. Could it be that the index will actually be located at -2 due to having a higher IBA? Or should I only compare those with higher SCORE? I included the simulation in my drive when the index is -1 to also compare it.
Code:88 vs T Sim 2*10^10 P. 5.50/6 Spread 1-16 ($10-$160) S17 DOA DAS RSA SPL3 ES10 OBBO +-------+--------+---------+--------+-------+--------+-------+-------+--------+---------+----------+ | Index | EV | Win/Rnd | ROR | DI | SCORE | CE | N0 | IBA | Win/Rnd | Win/Hour | +-------+--------+---------+--------+-------+--------+-------+-------+--------+---------+----------+ | -1 | 2.297% | 0.64 | 13.50% | 12.51 | 156.39 | 31.83 | 6,394 | 0.085% | 0.08 | 8.49 | | -2 | 2.321% | 0.62 | 13.50% | 12.54 | 157.31 | 31.07 | 6,357 | 0.086% | 0.09 | 8.60 | | -3 | 2.327% | 0.62 | 13.40% | 12.55 | 157.39 | 31.09 | 6,353 | 0.086% | 0.09 | 8.58 | | -4 | 2.322% | 0.63 | 13.60% | 12.55 | 157.55 | 31.12 | 6,347 | 0.086% | 0.09 | 8.57 | | -5 | 2.320% | 0.62 | 13.50% | 12.54 | 157.18 | 31.04 | 6,362 | 0.086% | 0.09 | 8.59 | | -6 | 2.329% | 0.62 | 13.40% | 12.55 | 157.50 | 31.11 | 6,349 | 0.086% | 0.09 | 8.61 | | R | 2.323% | 0.62 | 13.40% | 12.55 | 157.45 | 31.10 | 6,351 | 0.085% | 0.08 | 8.46 | +-------+--------+---------+--------+-------+--------+-------+-------+--------+---------+----------+
Last edited by Softhony; 02-10-2024 at 10:37 PM. Reason: Corrección tabla
Sincerely,
Anthony Davalos
Yes I did it that way, with the spread of 1-1, but to see all the decimals I just raised the flat bet this time to $1k. Additionally, I obtained more data on the other penetrations and the different spreads.
Code:+-------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+ | + | Index | -2 | -3 | -4 | -5 | -6 | R Siempre | +-------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+ | Pen. | Spread | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | +-------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+ | 4.0/6 | 1-1 | -0.0380% | | -0.0386% | | -0.0385% | | -0.0376% | | -0.0370% | | -0.0394% | | | | 1-8 | | 35.13 | | 35.10 | | 35.25 | | 35.26 | | 35.20 | | 35.15 | | | 1-12 | | 42.25 | | 42.19 | | 42.35 | | 42.37 | | 42.31 | | 42.28 | | | 1-16 | | 46.40 | | 46.32 | | 46.49 | | 46.52 | | 46.46 | | 46.44 | | 4.5/6 | 1-1 | -0.0119% | | -0.0124% | | -0.0126% | | -0.0117% | | -0.0116% | | -0.0135% | | | | 1-8 | | 60.01 | | 60.02 | | 60.10 | | 60.12 | | 60.09 | | 60.01 | | | 1-12 | | 60.01 | | 60.02 | | 60.10 | | 60.12 | | 60.09 | | 60.01 | | | 1-16 | | 65.67 | | 65.68 | | 65.75 | | 65.77 | | 65.75 | | 65.68 | | 5.0/6 | 1-1 | 0.0247% | | 0.0244% | | 0.0242% | | 0.0249% | | 0.0251% | | 0.0231% | | | | 1-8 | | 88.11 | | 88.13 | | 88.32 | | 88.17 | | 88.33 | | 88.19 | | | 1-12 | | 88.11 | | 88.13 | | 88.32 | | 88.17 | | 88.33 | | 88.19 | | | 1-16 | | 96.29 | | 96.32 | | 96.50 | | 96.33 | | 96.53 | | 96.39 | | 5.5/6 | 1-1 | 0.0860% | | 0.0858% | | 0.0857% | | 0.0859% | | 0.0861% | | 0.0846% | | | | 1-8 | | 120.84 | | 120.88 | | 121.04 | | 120.74 | | 121.01 | | 120.90 | | | 1-12 | | 143.92 | | 143.99 | | 144.15 | | 143.80 | | 144.12 | | 144.04 | | | 1-16 | | 157.31 | | 157.39 | | 157.55 | | 157.18 | | 157.50 | | 157.45 | +-------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+----------+--------+
Sincerely,
Anthony Davalos
Interesting results. It's hard to draw a conclusion since the standard error is surely present. How many rounds did you simulate in each case?
If it was 50 billion, it's likely that we need to consider twice that. If we consider the RA-index, it seems that "-4" is only appropriate for 5.5/6,
while "-5" and "-6" are good for shallower penetrations. In the case of the EM-index, it seems to be defined between "-5" and "-6".
Anyway, it would be ideal for Norm to activate the code in CVIndex.
What we are sure of is that the OBBO index is between "-1" (OBO) and "-6" (ENHC).
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
I did it!I simulated one hundred billion hands, in the case of the same SCORE I have highlighted the one that appeared highest in the "Compare All" of the CVCX. Std Err is 0.001% W/L
Code:SIM Hi Lo Catch 22* Fab 4** S17 DAS RSA SPL3 ES10 OBBO 88 vs T (1.0e11) +-------+--------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+--------------------+ | | Index | -1 | -2 | -3 | -4 | -5 | -6 | +-------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+ | Pen | Spread | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | IBA | SCORE | +-------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+ | 4.0/6 | 1-1 | -0.03811% | | -0.03838% | | -0.03812% | | -0.03793% | | -0.03842% | | -0.03894% | | | | 1-8 | | 35.17 | | 35.18 | | 35.15 | | 35.18 | | 35.16 | | 35.11 | | | 1-12 | | 42.27 | | 42.30 | | 42.25 | | 42.29 | | 42.26 | | 42.23 | | | 1-16 | | 46.42 | | 46.45 | | 46.40 | | 46.44 | | 46.40 | | 46.37 | | 4.5/6 | 1-1 | -0.01215% | | -0.01223% | | -0.01230% | | -0.01217% | | -0.01239% | | -0.01317% | | | | 1-8 | | 50.11 | | 50.12 | | 50.06 | | 50.10 | | 50.11 | | 50.05 | | | 1-12 | | 60.04 | | 60.05 | | 59.98 | | 60.03 | | 60.03 | | 59.99 | | | 1-16 | | 65.70 | | 65.71 | | 65.63 | | 65.68 | | 65.68 | | 65.65 | | 5.0/6 | 1-1 | 0.02472% | | 0.02435% | | 0.02446% | | 0.02452% | | 0.02424% | | 0.02377% | | | | 1-8 | | 74.01 | | 73.97 | | 73.93 | | 73.93 | | 74.01 | | 73.96 | | | 1-12 | | 88.25 | | 88.21 | | 88.15 | | 88.15 | | 88.24 | | 88.21 | | | 1-16 | | 96.44 | | 96.39 | | 96.34 | | 96.32 | | 96.43 | | 96.40 | | 5.5/6 | 1-1 | 0.08618% | | 0.08595% | | 0.08615% | | 0.08603% | | 0.08557% | | 0.08501% | | | | 1-8 | | 120.95 | | 120.95 | | 120.89 | | 120.90 | | 120.94 | | 120.82 | | | 1-12 | | 144.05 | | 144.05 | | 143.98 | | 143.98 | | 144.05 | | 143.91 | | | 1-16 | | 157.43 | | 157.44 | | 157.37 | | 157.36 | | 157.45 | | 157.31 | +-------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+-----------+--------+ *Additional indices: A7 vs. A (+1), TT vs. 4 (+7) **ES: 15 vs. 9 (+2), 16 vs. 9 (-1) and 16 vs. 8 (+4)
Sincerely,
Anthony Davalos
Hmm, I believe that the standard error is still present and I don't think it will be solved even with 200 billion rounds. It was a good attempt anyway.More or less I am getting closer to your estimated results, dear Cacarulo.
I'm also not sure about my index (-3). It was an estimation since I don't have implemented OBBO with ES in my simulator.
The only thing we can affirm is that the index is between "-1" and "-6". Any value within that range will be better than the extremes.
Norm has the final verdict
Sincerely,
Cac
Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.
Posting Permissions
-*-
Reply With Quote
ES10 OBBO index for 88 vs. T
Bookmarks