Poker Iq test

[Jeff76]

124- which provides a lot of evidence that this is not the most accurate test of poker ability [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[jjacky]

132

i agree that the test is flawed and not very meaningful. but somewhat fun.

[Rekwob]

127

this is really really bad btw, but props for the arrogance to think you know enough about poker to come up with this

[timex]

Gobbo owned this test by just making the big laydowns.

[anotherFliplost]

[ QUOTE ]
Gobbo owned this test by just making the big laydowns.

[/ QUOTE ]

Truth? I had a feeling that the authors suffered from serious MOTB syndrome (but I didn't answer accordingly).

[Strickly Bidness]

here's why this test sucks....There are a few very close decisions that can really sway your score. Problem is that there is too much info left out for these questions...

I scored 121 the first time and changed only the 3-4 close decisions to a tighter style and the score popped out a crappy 102.

The questions that can really change your score are: 24 (very close call here), 33(come on this is tricky and close-I can see myself folding this), 35, 36 (i call but could see someone folding w/more info).

Hell, just change these few questions from aggressive moves to tighter ones and you go from 121 to 102...WTF???

[Strickly Bidness]

omg..looked into this test further and realized that speed is much more important than anything....if you fly through and give your first reaction you are gonna do better than sitting there pondering the best answer....WTF WTF??? I mean, poker isn't about a quick answer anyway so WTF kinda [censored] marketing scam is this anyway? You can actually stick in a wide range of crazy answers from tight to aggro and get about 125 or so if you just do it really fast....They need to explain that speed is the majority of the test, not accuracy in answers.

Stupid test.

[runout_mick]

127

I think the authors probably want you to lay down more than I did...

[kindling]

not sure I understand the scoring of the test. Took it once, tried to think about the answers, got interrupted a few times. I got 100.

Took it again, as fast as possible, under 1 minute for whole thing, answering fold when it was an option, 1st answer otherwise, and only giving any time to a couple of questions.

Got exactly 100 again. Difference in time must have made up for my almost random answers.

[Strickly Bidness]

[ QUOTE ]
not sure I understand the scoring of the test. Took it once, tried to think about the answers, got interrupted a few times. I got 100.

Took it again, as fast as possible, under 1 minute for whole thing, answering fold when it was an option, 1st answer otherwise, and only giving any time to a couple of questions.

Got exactly 100 again. Difference in time must have made up for my almost random answers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is the problem. This isn't a test of poker smarts...its a test of speed. They didnt tell us that did they? if they had we could have optimized our strategy.