[knappis]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, it is, but you haven't calculated the probability of our fundamental suspicion, which isn't that he folded everytime someone else had a big pair (he didn't) but that he started wit 93% of his hands but never called a river beat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, thats a tough one. Modelling post flop play is far more difficult than preflop play. If we had a very large sample we could assume an even distribution of cards for a random board and hole cards. I'm not so sure this is appropriate for the small number of hands we have here and even if it was, the confidence intervals would be extreme.

The easisest to model is what I did above, and as you can see, even those estimates aren´t exact and rely on assumptions that we don´t know are true.

The second most easy thing to model is the probability of having a high winrate. It has been reported that this guy had a SD of 270ptbb/100 which too me is insane and I am not to sure we can trust these numbers. However, If these numbers are correct and we assume a losing player with -50ptbb/100 it would mean that 5% of all 100 hand sequenses would be outside -50+-2*270PTBB/100. That is, 2.5% of the 100 hand sequenses would show +490PTBB/100 or more and another 2.5% would show a loss of 590PTBB/100. Both would occur in average every 4000 hands. I imagine that the extreme winning sessions would look like he could see hole cards and the extreme losing sessions would look like chip dumping.

Anyway, a SD of 270PTBB/100 sounds really extreme too me and I'm not too sure that figure is beleivable even for a maniac like this.