Defining and ranking players

Ask questions, discuss and debate your strategies, euchre polls and more
Post Reply
Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Defining and ranking players

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:41 pm

Players rankings based upon win percentage and how many in general terms fit into each rankings based upon my vast playing experience. This is a view into the general population of all euchre players.


40-49% win percentage: poor. About 15% of all players.

50-55% win percentage: avg. to slightly above avg. About 65% of all players.

56-59% win percentage: good. About 15% of all players.

60-65% win percentage: excellent. About 4.5% of all players.

66-70% win percentage: exceptional. About 0.5% or less of all players.


Now this is taken as a whole and the percentages will vary naturally with what type of players you are playing against and also what type of partners you'll have. In the end no matter what your skill level is. You still need a partner. The better your partner is the better you will do, over
the long run. The above win percentages and player rankings are taken in consideration for thousands of games played. However, it is attainable to play at a high win rate in the short term vs the general population of euchre players.

Also another note to add. As one climbs the ranks of becoming a good to excellent player the margin of errors really defines these players and percentages.

Now whenever we here talk or pose questions we can have a better understanding of what scenarios and players we are dealing with when setting up hands and ploys.

Tbolt65
Edward

Edit: update and spacing.



irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:40 pm

Good try but I see little value in the post.

What was your source on this these ratings? What is the foundation for these stated number? Looks like SWAG! How is it even possible to rate or rank all players? There is no tabulation of this that I am aware of. Almost sounds like Eric's trash, the Power Euchre Player. We know he's an expert, Ha ha.

But the bigger issue I see is this: It does not make since, using your numbers 85% of all euchre players win more than 50% of the games. Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible.

How did you factor out the cheaters? Why are there no one listed below 40%? Beginners win immediately 40% of their games. Maybe fast learners.

As to the questions or discussions on this web site, how do you know where they fit in? So how does one rely on information when you have no idea what their skill level is? To do that, you would have to have those posting play against and with all others who post (as well as the general population)? Or do we just rely on those who are self proclaimed 'EXPERTS' as real experts. You can't take one hand and post about it without considering all the previous hands and subsequent hands in a particular game. There a setting of previous hands that impact the next hand to put it all in context. One hand in isolation does not tell the whole story.

"As one climbs the ranks of becoming a good to excellent player the margin of errors really defines these players and percentages."

Those in the over 65% win rate are obviously playing against those with a win rate less than 50%. I've been around euchre too long to see anyone at a win rate over 65% playing again other good quality euchre players on a consistent basis. The way the cards fall (randomly dealt as assumed) 30% of the time, you don't have the cards, lucky to hold the opponent to one point, and vice versa, 30% your opponents don't have the cards. This is even just average players. That is about 60% of the game. It's the other remaining 40% that is somewhat up for grabs. And there is no way in hell anyone on this earth has the skill set to get all of the other favorability of the other 40% to even reach a 70% win rate. My experience says to have a win rate of 55 to 60% against above average to good players, you are doing damn well. There will be times you won't even win again the average players. An old saying in euchre, two average players getting good cards will beat any two excellent players.

I look forward to meeting these 70% elite players. Where are they?

Just some things to chew on!


~Irishwolf

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Mon Dec 16, 2019 1:18 am

irishwolf wrote:
Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:40 pm
Good try but I see little value in the post.

/Sigh. Well for something of little value you obviously have an opinion and you obviously have a lot to say.

What was your source on this these ratings? What is the foundation for these stated number? Looks like SWAG! How is it even possible to rate or rank all players? There is no tabulation of this that I am aware of.

The source and foundation has already been stated. Tabulation? Does everything has to be done by math? No it doesn't but I tell you what. The power of observation is pretty strong as a rudimentary form of data collection. It may not be perfect or exact but you can get an general Idea and that's all I'm doing here.

But the bigger issue I see is this: It does not make since, using your numbers 85% of all euchre players win more than 50% of the games. Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible.

If you think wining 50, 51, 52 percent of the games in euchre good then you really don't have an idea of how bad these players are. I mean cards alone, the luck factor if one just followed suit and kept playing your cards you'll fall some where in the 40-49 percentile I personally believe its impossible over thousands of games to be below or in the 30% win percentage. Luck alone dictates you win more in my experience. With that said 80% of the players are not that good. Only when you start to approach 55-56% you start to really separate yourself from the low end of the weaker players in the general pool of euchre players as a whole. Can you have success in the low to mid 50s percentile range? Sure but only against those of lesser players in the long run, or if the deck hits you in the short run.

How did you factor out the cheaters? Why are there no one listed below 40%? Beginners win immediately 40% of their games. Maybe fast learners.

I didn't. I already stated above, I personally believe its impossible over thousands of games to be below or in the 30% win percentage. Luck alone dictates you win more in my experience.

As to the questions or discussions on this web site, how do you know where they fit in? So how does one rely on information when you have no idea what their skill level is? To do that, you would have to have those posting play against and with all others who post (as well as the general population)? Or do we just rely on those who are self proclaimed 'EXPERTS' as real experts. You can't take one hand and post about it without considering all the previous hands and subsequent hands in a particular game. There a setting of previous hands that impact the next hand to put it all in context. One hand in isolation does not tell the whole story.

It gives people an idea of skill level and play and takes into consideration non-optimal playing and mistakes by players. Would you play the same way with someone who doesn't order, calls much or even leads the correct cards back to you? As with someone with a firm grasp of when and when not to lead trump and when to call in various spots? You most certainly would play differently to adjust to the lesser player so that you can optimize your teams chances of scoring. As to the bottom half of your paragraph I'm responding to. I agree with you.



"As one climbs the ranks of becoming a good to excellent player the margin of errors really defines these players and percentages."

Those in the over 65% win rate are obviously playing against those with a win rate less than 50%. I've been around euchre too long to see anyone at a win rate over 65% playing again other good quality euchre players on a consistent basis. The way the cards fall (randomly dealt as assumed) 30% of the time, you don't have the cards, lucky to hold the opponent to one point, and vice versa, 30% your opponents don't have the cards. This is even just average players. That is about 60% of the game. It's the other remaining 40% that is somewhat up for grabs. And there is no way in hell anyone on this earth has the skill set to get all of the other favorability of the other 40% to even reach a 70% win rate. My experience says to have a win rate of 55 to 60% against above average to good players, you are doing damn well. There will be times you won't even win again the average players. An old saying in euchre, two average players getting good cards will beat any two excellent players.

Yes and No. Those people with those win rates are playing with good to excellent partner or even the exceptional ones. Playing vs any array of players but most are generally in the 40-55% range of players while Some are in the 56-65% players. I must remind you its a Team game and for anyone to get those number and stay there, they must have an accommodating partner. But of course if they are constantly playing lesser players then the need for those higher partners start to diminish. Look, I didn't break it down to when good to exceptional players are playing each other. The win rates can still be high in the short term, but over all in the long run you'll see win rates with-in those player groups from my experience be much lower. Does this then make them poorer players? No. It really comes down to mistakes made, and cards as well. But I place the little mistakes as I say more of a determining factor at such a high level of play to cause one to lose than that of just luck of the cards. I'm not taking away the luck factor but just at the higher levels you will pay for your mistakes because you can't afford to make them when your opponents are nearly as good as you or better. It is just hard to come back. That is why you must maximize every point and look for any weakness in your opponents play.

Yes that is possible in the short-run with two average players vs 2 excellent players in getting good cards but skill in the long run will over come it and those excellent players will shine through
.






I look forward to meeting these 70% elite players. Where are they?

That's just the end or top of my tier that I layed out. I never seen them either in the long run. I"ve hit over 70% personally myself and seen others do it in the short run with random partners of varying skill levels. Its possible but the highest I think I ever seen was like 66-67% and I can count that on my right hand, that had thousands of games in. If you are wondering it wasn't me. I'm not that vain. I however will tell you this, I do know my stuff.

Just some things to chew on!

Back at ya. 8-)


Tbolt65
Edward


~Irishwolf

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:11 pm

Ed,
I liked your follow up better than the original post. I totally misunderstood these as general observations and comments about ranking/rating players. I can buy that and let’s move on about any exactness. Maybe a fault of mine, and if offensive to you, then accept my apology? I am drawn to numbers that don’t make sense, not just your post on the rankings. The 85% winning more than 50% was just a glaring impossibility.
For the postings and comments, there is no such thing as a dumb question. I encourage all to comment and ask questions. It makes all of us better players. And just remember, NO ONE PLAYS PERFECT EUCHRE 100% of the time. And I am sure of all the mistakes made in Euchre, I have made them at one time or another (and sometimes twice). I just hope to know enough to NOT keep repeating them.

So I liked your follow, and thanks for the “back at you.”

~Irishwolf

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:41 pm

Hehe, yeah it did feel a bit gruff/rough response I was getting ptsd from my days back when I'd be hammering things out with Natty. Although we buried the hatchet long ago. Anyways it's all good thanks for the clarification.


I agree never a dumb question and we all, make mistakes. Usually when we are tired, not paying attention or playing too fast. It happens to us all.

Thanks Irishwolf, and no problem. ;)


Tbolt65
Edward

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:28 pm

ut the bigger issue I see is this: It does not make since, using your numbers 85% of all euchre players win more than 50% of the games. Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible.
Technically, it does but it's extremely unlikely using totally random partners and opponents. It actually is possible if literally almost everybody plays against the bottom 15% of players. That's highly unlikely in a random test. Plus, if that 15% was constantly losing, they'd almost certainly just quit playing the game, so it doesn't fit with human nature.

Luck alone would indicate that the majority of the euchre population wins somewhere 45% and the mid-50s%. Most sites online that do ranking systems put me in the top half of ranking systems and my win percentage with a random partner and opponents within 10% of me either way give me a 50% win rate, calculated across more than 30,000 games. Luck plays a pretty big role in that. Yes, there are strategies that you can use to improve your win rate, but there's going to be very few people that deviate more than 5% of that due to the fact that you have to have the cards to achieve wins.

I'd argue that most skilled players have no more than a 55% rate and most absolute exceptional players are going to be no more than 60% and that's assuming that their partner is just as good as them and the opponents are at least a step or two below. So I'd argue that most very, very skilled players are somewhere in the 50%-60% range, depending both on the luck inherent in the cards you receive and that your partner is just as skilled.

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:03 pm

REDDU7KE,

I will state it again: "Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible."

Richardb02
Posts: 581
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
Location: Florida

Unread post by Richardb02 » Fri Dec 20, 2019 8:07 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:41 pm
Players rankings based upon win percentage and how many in general terms fit into each rankings based upon my vast playing experience. This is a view into the general population of all euchre players.


40-49% win percentage: poor. About 15% of all players.

50-55% win percentage: avg. to slightly above avg. About 65% of all players.

56-59% win percentage: good. About 15% of all players.

60-65% win percentage: excellent. About 4.5% of all players.

66-70% win percentage: exceptional. About 0.5% or less of all players.


Now this is taken as a whole and the percentages will vary naturally with what type of players you are playing against and also what type of partners you'll have. In the end no matter what your skill level is. You still need a partner. The better your partner is the better you will do, over
the long run. The above win percentages and player rankings are taken in consideration for thousands of games played. However, it is attainable to play at a high win rate in the short term vs the general population of euchre players.

Also another note to add. As one climbs the ranks of becoming a good to excellent player the margin of errors really defines these players and percentages.

Now whenever we here talk or pose questions we can have a better understanding of what scenarios and players we are dealing with when setting up hands and ploys.

Tbolt65
Edward

Edit: update and spacing.
I grasp the concept of Tbolt’s concept but I struggle to explain it. Let me try to rephrase Tbolts’s information:
65% of the players have a winning percentage above 50-55%.
So it’s not the median, 50% above and 50% below, it is the average.
Talking from a median view:
50% of people have a winning percentage < 52% (ny guesstimate)
50% of people have a winning percentage +>52% (another guesstimate)
My conclusion:
Tbolt left out those with a winning percentage less than 40%.
I understand, they suck. (I am not politically correct).
They make up 20% of the players but,
They comprise 50% of the losses.
Now 50% (<40%) & 15% (40-49%)=65%, which equals
65% in Tbolt’s post with a winning percentage above 50%
QED


irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:13 pm

Then let's suppose, Redduke, you have 100,000 games played by 2000 players. For each game two have win and two have to lose. So how are you going to breakdown the games based on wins and losses for these 2000 players, 100,000 games for (must fit the win rate ranges and win percentages) the categories given above.

Good Luck!

~Irishwolf

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:36 am

irishwolf wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:03 pm
REDDU7KE,

I will state it again: "Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible."
Not impossible. Just highly improbable. The math does work (sorry, but I've got a PhD in Statistics) IF those 85% are playing the losing 15% pretty consistently and those 15% of players would have to be pretty consistently dealt terrible hand, then it is technically possible. The odds that that'll happen in a random matchup of players of players on a consistent is very low (like so low that it's virtually impossible). I bet you that I'd have a better chance of going to Las Vegas, sitting down at a 5-card draw table and promptly getting 5 pat straight flushes in a row. Statistically, that'll happen once in about 10 billion years. So we're saying the same thing... I'm just elaborating on what you're saying.
So it’s not the median, 50% above and 50% below, it is the average.
Talking from a median view:
50% of people have a winning percentage < 52% (ny guesstimate)
50% of people have a winning percentage +>52% (another guesstimate)
My conclusion:
Tbolt left out those with a winning percentage less than 40%.
I understand, they suck. (I am not politically correct).
They make up 20% of the players but,
They comprise 50% of the losses.
Now 50% (<40%) & 15% (40-49%)=65%, which equals
65% in Tbolt’s post with a winning percentage above 50%
QED
There's a huge difference between median and mean. I trust I don't need to explain those concepts to anyone.

I have an easier time believing your numbers than his. Luck plays a bigger role than any of us think. I mean, I've been holding this as the dealer:

(Card_J-C) (Card_Q-S) (Card_K-S) (Card_A-H) (Card_K-H)

with spades as trump (called by me) and gotten euchred because an opponent was literally holding all four of the remaining trumps. Anyone on this forum will tell you that I made the right call by picking up the king of spades in that scenario!

There's elements like that that we can't really account for mathematically. The odds were definitely in my favor by calling with that hand but I lost anyway.

But yeah, over time, I figure most euchre players have a normal distribution (bell curve) with the peak right around 50%. I doubt that most players stray much from that mean... probably not more than 2 standard deviations, with the absolute best players being two standard deviations above it. What I don't know is how big those standard deviations are. I suggested 5% in my post, but I suspect that my number was too large.

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:04 am

RedDuke, Okay PhD, you said is "possible," (forget what's probable) and I gave you the 100,000 games, wins 50,000 and losses 50,000 break it down for the given 2000 players to fit the win percentages. I am not letting you off the Hook.

YOU CAN'T DO IT! Show me the Math works out! Prove me wrong, Ha ha!

~Irishwolf



irishwolf wrote: ↑
Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:03 pm
REDDUKE,

I will state it again: "Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible."

RedDuke says, Not impossible. Just highly improbable. The math does work (sorry, but I've got a PhD in Statistics) IF those 85% are playing the losing 15% pretty consistently and those 15% of players would have to be pretty consistently dealt terrible hand, then it is technically possible.

Then let's suppose, RedDuke, you have 100,000 games played by 2000 players. For each game two have win and two have to lose. So how are you going to breakdown the games based on wins and losses for these 2000 players, 100,000 games for (must fit the win rate ranges and win percentages) the categories given above

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:26 pm

While we don't have yahoo or pogo's great database of players to draw from anymore. The only site I have found where you can see stats on the players and not just your own is at "playok euchre" website. This is where I would direct those to get a first hand look at players with thousands of games played to get an inkling of what I have mentioned. You can go through the players stats and see what partners they had up to 6 months prior and from that go into other players stats and do the same to widen your scope of research and data of players with thousands of games played and start to get a general feel.

Now just prior typing this. I did the same. Although not extensively I must admit. I already know in general terns what's its looks like. But out of only a couple hundred of players I found one person at a 39% win rate. Although it wasn't thousands of games played. Around 800ish played. I still maintain that with the inherent luck in the game for the long run the worst you'll see is that 40-49% range. In the short term anything is possible on both ends of the spectrum. Edit: Well nearly anything is possible.

Tbolt65
Edward

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 3:22 pm

RedDuke wrote:
Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:28 pm


Technically, it does but it's extremely unlikely using totally random partners and opponents. It actually is possible if literally almost everybody plays against the bottom 15% of players. That's highly unlikely in a random test. Plus, if that 15% was constantly losing, they'd almost certainly just quit playing the game, so it doesn't fit with human nature.



Also with human nature comes with fallacies. If you think you know it all or are doing good irrespective of the situation you will continue on thinking everything is fine and continue with said behavior.

Go see my last post. You will find players losing in the 40-49% range with thousands of games played.

Luck alone would indicate that the majority of the euchre population wins somewhere 45% and the mid-50s%. Most sites online that do ranking systems put me in the top half of ranking systems and my win percentage with a random partner and opponents within 10% of me either way give me a 50% win rate, calculated across more than 30,000 games. Luck plays a pretty big role in that. Yes, there are strategies that you can use to improve your win rate, but there's going to be very few people that deviate more than 5% of that due to the fact that you have to have the cards to achieve wins.

I'd argue that most skilled players have no more than a 55% rate and most absolute exceptional players are going to be no more than 60% and that's assuming that their partner is just as good as them and the opponents are at least a step or two below. So I'd argue that most very, very skilled players are somewhere in the 50%-60% range, depending both on the luck inherent in the cards you receive and that your partner is just as skilled.
From what I have seen.
It is much harder to pick and choose a particular partner now a days. Although it can be done. I just have to disagree with you here in respects to what you think is possible. I have personally won 63% of my games with a little over 3,000 games played before in yahoo. I had various partners but mostly they were good players, some where above avg. Only a few where excellent players. I would only agree with you though if said exceptional player's played each other exclusively. 55% would be close to the top end in the long run that is. Again I would agree only if the very skilled player, it might be possible to reach 60% in the long run. Playing exclusively with the same group that is. Although it's likely to be a couple percentage points lower.

Tbolt65
Edward

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1189
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:33 pm

All I know is that if one's long term winning percentage is in the 55-60% range on the Karman games app you are in elite company. Winning is much tougher when you have to deal with the "go under" option--which adds a TON of variance to the game and thus takes away a significant chunk of an expert's edge (euchre is very hard when your opponents go under. Now their range is stronger and the kitty will never save you)--and on top of that you have to constantly deal with clueless partners who almost seem like they're purposely trying to sabotage you. It's basically you vs 3 most of the time.

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:36 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:04 am
RedDuke, Okay PhD, you said is "possible," (forget what's probable) and I gave you the 100,000 games, wins 50,000 and losses 50,000 break it down for the given 2000 players to fit the win percentages. I am not letting you off the Hook.

YOU CAN'T DO IT! Show me the Math works out! Prove me wrong, Ha ha!

~Irishwolf



irishwolf wrote: ↑
Fri Dec 20, 2019 7:03 pm
REDDUKE,

I will state it again: "Does not fit mathematically or statistically. Only 15% win less that 50% of the games played? Impossible."

RedDuke says, Not impossible. Just highly improbable. The math does work (sorry, but I've got a PhD in Statistics) IF those 85% are playing the losing 15% pretty consistently and those 15% of players would have to be pretty consistently dealt terrible hand, then it is technically possible.

Then let's suppose, RedDuke, you have 100,000 games played by 2000 players. For each game two have win and two have to lose. So how are you going to breakdown the games based on wins and losses for these 2000 players, 100,000 games for (must fit the win rate ranges and win percentages) the categories given above
You really want to see me do a multivariate calculus and combinatorics problem on these forums?

I already told you, I agree with you. The odds are so low that it's basically impossible and most people would consider it as such. Is it impossible for me to win the next 5 Powerball drawings in a row? No. The odds of winning the Powerball are 1 in 292,201,338. That's COMBIN(69,5) * COMBIN(29.1). So the odds of winning 5 Powerballs in a row are 1 in 1,461,006,690 since each drawing is independent of each other. Is that number 0? No. But it may as well be because that number is close enough to zero that it's EXTREMELY unlikely to happen in any of our lifetimes. But it is technically possible and in fact it could start for me the next time I buy a lottery ticket.

The same thing goes for your suggestion. In order to calculate the actual odds, I'd have to know the number of euchre players worldwide and their win percentages. I don't. I'd also have to calculate the probabilities of each of them being dealt a particular hand. I'd also have to calculate the odds that the partners of each of the players would be assigned in such a way that the bottom 15% of players always ends up against each other and play against the top 85% of players. I'd literally need a quantum computer to calculate those odds! The odds against it are astronomical! In fact, the sun will probably burn out before it happens! But the number isn't zero.

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:17 pm

Wes (aka the legend) wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:33 pm
All I know is that if one's long term winning percentage is in the 55-60% range on the Karman games app you are in elite company. Winning is much tougher when you have to deal with the "go under" option--which adds a TON of variance to the game and thus takes away a significant chunk of an expert's edge (euchre is very hard when your opponents go under. Now their range is stronger and the kitty will never save you)--and on top of that you have to constantly deal with clueless partners who almost seem like they're purposely trying to sabotage you. It's basically you vs 3 most of the time.
Combined with the go under and the lead starts at the left of the loner. Also factor in the lesser play overall at that place. It really is harder and like Wes said, it's literally 3v1 most of the time. I blame the crutches that limit the potential of having cards buried. The unknown factor is gone. You really cant have a teaching moment there at all. Perhaps in friendly mode, where you can set your own table standards but it's really hard to have ppl play normal euchre. Normal euchre there is not the standard. People won't play unless you have go under selected for your non rated tables.

You can pump your win rate up pretty good because of the bad players but combined with luck and the 3v1 atmosphere your avg. In the long run will come down and I'm in agreement with Wes on the percentages there for the most part.


Tbolt65
Edward

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:38 am

Tbolt65 wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 8:17 pm
Wes (aka the legend) wrote:
Sat Dec 21, 2019 5:33 pm
All I know is that if one's long term winning percentage is in the 55-60% range on the Karman games app you are in elite company. Winning is much tougher when you have to deal with the "go under" option--which adds a TON of variance to the game and thus takes away a significant chunk of an expert's edge (euchre is very hard when your opponents go under. Now their range is stronger and the kitty will never save you)--and on top of that you have to constantly deal with clueless partners who almost seem like they're purposely trying to sabotage you. It's basically you vs 3 most of the time.
Combined with the go under and the lead starts at the left of the loner. Also factor in the lesser play overall at that place. It really is harder and like Wes said, it's literally 3v1 most of the time. I blame the crutches that limit the potential of having cards buried. The unknown factor is gone. You really cant have a teaching moment there at all. Perhaps in friendly mode, where you can set your own table standards but it's really hard to have ppl play normal euchre. Normal euchre there is not the standard. People won't play unless you have go under selected for your non rated tables.

You can pump your win rate up pretty good because of the bad players but combined with luck and the 3v1 atmosphere your avg. In the long run will come down and I'm in agreement with Wes on the percentages there for the most part.


Tbolt65
Edward
That would even kick up the number of variables that I've have to add into the calculation that irishwolf asked me to perform above. I'd have to factor in the percentage chance that a player will go under AND that if he doesn't go under, another player might. Some players might not go under when they can and others might, so even that factors into the equation. I've even seen hands where multiple players were in a position to go under... so we'd have to include the probabilities that an opponent or partner would go under first!

I'm not going to be able to perform that kind of multivariate calculus problem without access to the best supercomputer in the world and at least some of these variables predefined (which they aren't). I can tell you that the possibility that 85% of the world's euchre players have greater than 50% win percentage is not zero. But it's probably some ridiculous fraction that could be rounded to zero. Thus, irishwolf's suggestion that the idea is impossible is incorrect because the number is not zero, but it's close enough to zero that it can be rounded to the point of being impossible.

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 11:56 am

Yeah but adding in non- traditional playing rules would only hamper what your trying to mathematical prove/show. As you have even stated yourself.


As a whole the 40-49% win rate is not exact at that level of play it's mostly cards/luck that keeps someone there at that level. It could be as high as 20% in the General euchre population.
At garman euchre app. Though it may be as high as 25-30%. Wes has about 20k more games in than me on that app. He would be the authority or close to it. Although I don't know if Wes could Gage what ppl in the 40-49% actually look like. For one really doesn't have data available to see at that site. He certainly can tell you the amount and prevalency of the many bad euchre players there are.


Tbolt65
Edward

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:33 pm

RedDuke,
you are the one not letting this drop. You said you agreed but continue to denied the impossibility. Common sense, no PhD needed that it is literally impossible for 15% to have a 40-49% win rate to lose enough games and still maintain that loss percentage for the other 85% of all euchre players who have greater than 50% win rate rankings as outlined. IF THE NUMBER WAS NOT 15% of the population, the possibility but not probability would then be true. But that is not the original statement. Only 15% has to have all those losses to cover the other 85% when 65% are 50 - 55% win rate (45 - 50% loss rate). That alone says you should re-think your statement. It takes no PhD to figure that out!

Now you say you have a PhD in Statistics. I gave you a hypothetical with 2000 players as the population and 100,000 games and you defaulted. You ran to hide.

I question your ability or at least you are not using you knowledge of statistics. In a post last night, you said the 9X was up and you had 10X, QX & KX and the dealer had JX JX AX. Why would you have to ask the question of the statistical odds (probability) of that holding if you know Statistics and have a PhD? I reviewed some of your other posts. You are not using probabilities from reading your comments. Strange! So either you don't have a PhD in Statistics or you are not using the knowledge you have. If you did, you would be the MOST knowledge but I just don't see it.

So the ball is in your court to provide the proof this is NOT impossible. So either provide your proof, or ..... up!

I rest my case!

~Irishwolf

RedDuke said, I can tell you that the possibility that 85% of the world's euchre players have greater than 50% win percentage is not zero. But it's probably some ridiculous fraction that could be rounded to zero. Thus, irishwolf's suggestion that the idea is impossible is incorrect because the number is not zero, but it's close enough to zero that it can be rounded to the point of being impossible.

This is a view into the general population of all euchre players.

40-49% win percentage: poor. About 15% of all players.

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:51 pm

While both of you debate mathematically what is and what isnt, read my previous post about 4 up from here. Regarding looking for yourselves. At the playok euchre site. I think is the only one really left where you can go and look at what players stats are and dig into. What I have roughly outlined in my estimates of the general euchre population.

Tbolt65
Edward

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:57 pm

Ed,

The only comment is that or every win there is a loss. Thus you have to have losses that support or balance out wins. I would estimate (SWAG) the wins and losses will be somewhere as outlined below: (Which is close to your estimates except for the losses. 60% of all players most likely will be 50% +/-3%)

Wins Player/Win
40 – 49.99 50%
50 - 53 32%
54 – 59 12%
60 – 64 4%
>64 2%

I could care less what the ratings or win percentages may be. I am interested in my play, ploys and errors. And the psychology of euchre play far exceeds the complexity of the card statistics.

But the point you made is where the focus should be, "Also another note to add. As one climbs the ranks of becoming a good to excellent player the margin of errors really defines these players and percentages.

Now whenever we here talk or pose questions we can have a better understanding of what scenarios and players we are dealing with when setting up hands and ploys."

~Irishwolf

Tbolt65
Posts: 487
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Sun Dec 22, 2019 7:34 pm

I was merely trying to paint a picture and clarify so that everyone is of the same frame of mind when we talk about, "assume average players", or "assume above average players" ect...ect. For our hand scenarios.

Some people took issue with the round about numbers I associated with each grouping. Again I was only trying to set up a template from which we all would be on the same page when discussing players in various scenarios, ploys and hands.


Tbolt65
Edward

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Mon Dec 23, 2019 12:29 am

Now you say you have a PhD in Statistics. I gave you a hypothetical with 2000 players as the population and 100,000 games and you defaulted. You ran to hide.
Fine. A euchre game has 4 players. So we randomly select 4 players out of that group to play a game. That's 2000C4 or 664,668,499,500 possible combinations.

Now, each of those hypothetical players can sit at any one of 4 seats. That's 4 to the 664,668,499,500 power possible matchups.

I actually wrote this python code to calculate THAT number:

Code: Select all

num_euchre_hands = 4**664668499500
print(num_euchre_hands)
and my 12-core PC at 3.9 Ghz with 32 gb of RAM wasn't able to calculate it in under 5 minutes. That's perfectly valid Python code, btw. No online math calculator that I've been able to find can calculate it either. So we're already talking about astronomical numbers.

Each of those players can have any one of 24C5 = 42,504 possible hands. A euchre game can have anywhere from 3 to 19 hand, which gives us a maximum possible hands across the entire population of 42,504*57*4^664,668,499,500 possible games, depending on how they are played. And even THAT ignores the order of the cards dealt as well as well as player skill. And that's just one hand. I'd have to repeat that same thing 100,000 times to meet your demands.

I could write a Python script that could simulate each of these possible combinations. There's not a computer on this planet that could run it. We're dealing with astronomical numbers. And that's not even the fun part. After I run this highly complex simulation, I'd have one possible scenario. And then I'd have to run it multiple times to get a statistically valid sampling.

I'd then have to divide the hypothetical players into 5% brackets based on win percentage and graph them. I suspect that if I ran this simulation an infinite number of times and plotted it, I would end up with Gaussian distribution in which most of the 5% brackets trended somewhere in around a mean 50% win percentage. But one of the characteristics of a Gaussian distribution is that it never hits 0% (impossible). Therefore, if I ran this simulation an infinite number of times, I could theoretically find at least one instance in which 85% of players had a win percentage over 50%. Therefore, it is not impossible based on the fact that a Gaussian distribution never reaches zero.

I could then continue to run this simulation an infinite amount of times to calculate an actual probability for you. There's just not a single computer on this planet that could calculate that probability. But tell you what, give me everything you own and every penny that you will ever earn to use to buy computer equipment and I'll try and calculate that probability for you.

In Statistics, a Gaussian distribution never hits zero. The actual percentage chance that it'll happen could very easily be something like 1 in 10E75. I have no way to calculate it. But the number is not zero, therefore it is not technically impossible.
Last edited by RedDuke on Mon Dec 23, 2019 12:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

irishwolf
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Mon Dec 23, 2019 12:48 am

You are seriously over complicating the issue. It's just wins and losses and you have to equal wins and equal losses. Thus 15% less that 50% wins cannot support 85% who have greater than 50% wins. COMMON SENSE!

If you ran something tha is infinite, ... if I ran this simulation an infinite number of times... " it would NEVER end. You cannot run anything an infinite number of times.

Give it up! I am done talking!

~Irishwolf

RedDuke
Posts: 393
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am

Unread post by RedDuke » Mon Dec 23, 2019 1:00 am

irishwolf wrote:
Mon Dec 23, 2019 12:48 am
You are seriously over complicating the issue. It's just wins and losses and you have to equal wins and equal losses. Thus 15% less that 50% wins cannot support 85% who have greater than 50% wins. COMMON SENSE!

If you ran something tha is infinite, ... if I ran this simulation an infinite number of times... " it would NEVER end. You cannot run anything an infinite number of times.

Give it up! I am done talking!

~Irishwolf
I have repeated multiple times throughout this thread that I believe the probability of this event happening is close enough to zero that it could be called zero by most people. It may be technically not, but still... we are on the same page in that I believe that the numbers in the original post are likely not correct.

Post Reply