[ QUOTE ]
you are a douche. stop being so f-ing cryptic. you are making vague, generic arguments with no evidence or data to back you up, and you're defending your point like a first grader.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I'm just emulating the "Sklansky" style here. I'll let others elaborate.
[ QUOTE ]
1) back up your arguments with some evidence, some data, or just some insightful logic, or
2) if you're so sure you're right, then use whatever mythical magical style you say works, keep it to yourself, make $, and stop being such a
prick.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm just here for my own personal amusement. As far as the simple logic, it's already been done. Statistics tell us that this guy is a winner. He's almost certainly a 1 BB/100 winner, and quite likely wins at a higher rate.
The idea that James can refute those statistics because "he knows" or because of a few anomalous hands is lunacy.
Simple logic says James doesn't know what he's talking about.
And, it's spelled p-r-O-c-k.
- Andrew
www.pokerstove.com