[Lestat]

I find it refreshing to see stats of a more mortal and earthly nature. In the beginning, there was so much talk about how 2bb/100 was the benchmark for good players, people like me started developing complexes with win rates rarely exceeding 1bb/100 over hundreds of thousands of hands in the bigger games, and sometimes going tens of thousands of hands at break-even. So it's nice to see sample sizes of .8bb/100 and lower for good professional players expert enough to author a book that is to be taken seriously by their peers.

Although I don't quite understand the spot picking of certain sample sizes. I believe you did this with the database I bought from you (where you inexplicably omitted large samples of hands). Although there were enough hands to justify the purchase, one has to wonder why you would do so. The default assumpion (in the absense of any explanation), has to be that you ommited some adverse stretches for aesthetic's sake. In a book, it's not like people can derive a more thorough analysis on your play from any larger of a sample size, so I don't understand the omission here either unless it is again for aesthetic reasons. The bigger the sample size, the more meaning statistical figures have. Why not use them all?