August mission - Be dealt 3 pair of Aces

[GotKot99]

Just a quick survey:

You guys who have completed the August Mission - just out of curiosity - how long did it take for you to get dealt 3 pocket aces in NLHE Cash Games?

I’ve got one pair, and even that took forever. After that I have played all-time record time without a pair of aces. Every other pair and combination of cards have been dealt like a gazillion times but NO pocket aces. This is hilarious 😂! And what makes it even more hilarious is that when I change to Hexapro or some MTT I almost right away get AA 🤣🙃!

Well it is, what it is - poker. And, of course, I still got one day left to hunt those two AAs. If I would have to bet…

Now time to sleep 😴 (maybe I dream of a lecture on variance given by @GR1ZZL3R or something 😆).

[GR1ZZL3R]

@GotKot99 

 

10 hours ago, GotKot99 said:

(maybe I dream of a lecture on variance given by @GR1ZZL3R or something 

   Variance can be a nightmare. 😱 That's all there is to say really but I'll expand a little bit and try not to sound lectury (might not be a word but I like it).

   As I see it no one really knows how deep or long or strong or wide variance can run, we can only use maths or statistics to some extent to guide us, but at the end of the day (cliche 1) we're still only guessing. We know that we should be dealt AA approximately once every 220* hands, but that really tells us nothing. As I mentioned elsewhere a single roulette number that should appear on average one in thirty seven spins can go missing for up to 500* attempts, that is over thirteen times its average span, so on that basis AA could go missing for 13 x 220* deals, 2,860*, not an average number at all. Of course I've no idea wether roulette variance is even remotely connected to poker dealing variance, I'm just throwing some numbers around for your perusal. Playing 6* tables at say 120* hands per table per hour you should definitely (maybe) see a pair of Aces just inside 4* hours, plenty of time to complete your mission today.* 😄   Good Luck. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                               

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

 

 

   

                                                                                      

 

 

 

 

                                                                                   

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                      

 

 

                                                                                                      

                                                                

 

 

 

 

*These figures are provided as a guide only and the author shall bear no responsibility for any loss incurred, financial emotional or otherwise, as a result of any one using them, wether for the purpose they were intended or not. 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by GR1ZZL3R

[Panamera]

Here is a random screenshot of me getting pocket aces only in ten hands. (Tho I'm not that far with missions to make it count for your survey)

[GR1ZZL3R]

10 hours ago, GotKot99 said:

how long did it take for you to get dealt 3 pocket aces in NLHE Cash Games?

Apologies, I didn't read that thoroughly so based my assumptions on being dealt one pocket pair of Aces. Still, multiplying by 3 you should be able to complete your mission a touch inside 12* hours, or 4 minutes.*

 

*It varies. 😲

 

 

 

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by GR1ZZL3R

[Panamera]

41 minutes ago, Panamera said:

Here is a random screenshot of me getting pocket aces only in ten hands. (Tho I'm not that far with missions to make it count for your survey)

Don't want to confuse anybody, it actually took approximately 140 hands in that session to get 3 times pocket aces (and after 25 or so I got 4th time pocket aces).

My point is that variance is huge and you might get that mission done very quickly (or not). 

[FreedoM]

1 hour ago, GR1ZZL3R said:

Playing 6* tables at say 120* hands per table per hour

It mostly depends on table dynamics how many hands you see in general but I think 120 is too much, you usually see on average somewhere between 70 and 100 hands/hour on Reg Tables and 2.5x to 3x more in the Fast-Fold variant. 🤔

[AbvUrPlayGrd]

6 minutes ago, FreedoM said:

It mostly depends on table dynamics how many hands you see in general but I think 120 is too much, you usually see on average somewhere between 70 and 100 hands/hour on Reg Tables

Yes and if you have someone like BoldBimbo or whatever they're called on your table, you will probably only manage 20 h/h while they run the clock down on every hand playing around with emotes 🤪

[GR1ZZL3R]

1 hour ago, FreedoM said:

It mostly depends on table dynamics how many hands you see in general but I think 120 is too much, you usually see on average somewhere between 70 and 100 hands/hour on Reg Tables and 2.5x to 3x more in the Fast-Fold variant. 🤔

   You're nearer than I thought @FreedoM Yesterday in the King of Flips it took me 620 hands on 3 tables, two hours, to see 90 flops, just about 107 hands per hour per table.

   Revised figures equate to fourteen and a quarter hours to see AA three times**, you'd better get cracking @GotKot99 

  

 

 

 

**Complete and utter worst case scenario, but of course they happen all the time in poker. 😖

Edited August 31, 2022 by GR1ZZL3R

[FreedoM]

As @Panamera said it mostly depends on variance on how fast you will get those aces.

[GotKot99]

Thanks guys for the posts!

I guess I try playing max. two cash tables today. If pocket aces are to come, they come. If not, then not.

Let’s try 🙃…

[GotKot99]

Mission accomplished! 💪

Played two tables most of the time (circa 2-2.5 hours), maybe 30 min only in one table. And there we go: two pocket aces. (Got some little wins from the cash tables, and also won 15€ from the 5€ Hexapro ticket right afterwards. So that went well 😎!

So, there’s the variance shown once again: Today it took only about 3h of play to get two pocket aces. Getting the first one, I think I played like 10h (one table though). And before today, hunting these two AAs, I played like three days and nothing.

Well. Nice to end the August mission with a positive note (though didn’t get to the final part)!

 

P.S. Special thanks to @GR1ZZL3R for the variance “lecture” (forgot to mention it earlier)

P.P.S. Longest streak of color red winning in a row in roulette is 32 times (In 1943 in Monte Carlo, at least according to this https://www.caesars.com/casino-gaming-blog/latest-posts/table-games/roulette/gambling-myth-monte-carlo-fallacy#.Yw-Ojy2U_mo. I guess there is a typo in the article mentioning first 1913 and then 1943 in the next paragraph. Or other way around. I haven’t checked the facts. Please, correct if I have given wrong information.

[GR1ZZL3R]

   The Monte Carlo fallacy is named after the first notable run recorded of one colour appearing consecutively, black 26 times in 1913. This has been beaten many times since then but that 1913 example is cited more than any other and the fallacy is named after that example.Many players went bust assuming, incorrectly that red was "due" after so many blacks, backing red more and more heavily, while a few others made money by continuing to bet black, assuming the run must continue, again incorrectly. Both red and black were slightly worse than 50-50 to appear the next spin, which is always the case no matter how many times any colour has appeared in a row. The 1943 case was from an American casino, red 32 times in a row, don't they always have to have bigger and better (worse) examples? 🤣

Edited August 31, 2022 by GR1ZZL3R

[GotKot99]

4 hours ago, GR1ZZL3R said:

   The Monte Carlo fallacy is named after the first notable run recorded of one colour appearing consecutively, black 26 times in 1913. This has been beaten many times since then but that 1913 example is cited more than any other and the fallacy is named after that example.Many players went bust assuming, incorrectly that red was "due" after so many blacks, backing red more and more heavily, while a few others made money by continuing to bet black, assuming the run must continue, again incorrectly. Both red and black were slightly worse than 50-50 to appear the next spin, which is always the case no matter how many times any colour has appeared in a row. The 1943 case was from an American casino, red 32 times in a row, don't they always have to have bigger and better (worse) examples? 🤣

Thanks @GR1ZZL3R for this! (So the Monte Carlo fallacy got it’s name from those blacks appearing in a row 26 times in 1913 in Monte Carlo, and the “red row” of 32 times in 1943 in some American casino. Thanks for correcting.)

Do you or does someone else know which casino was in question in 1943 with the “red row”? Just being curious 🧐