*OFFICIAL* MTT Team Challenge (May 2006) DRAFT ELIGIBILITY THREAD - Page 11

zipppy · #**101** 04-18-2006, 12:31 AM

[ QUOTE ]
God I REALLY wish people would wait for me to do things. The categories werent even set in stone, nor is much of the competition. When I want to start things I will.
~Justin

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry about that Justin. I saw people posting their categories in the main thread anyway, and since you had posted official rules in that thread I tried to simply extract what this thread would need from it. My bad.

zip

Ansky · #**102** 04-18-2006, 01:28 AM

* I am not saying this because my DB stats are awful *

I don't really think it's a good idea to print off stats from the db (not that nat would allow it). First and foremost it would be a nice list of who has run hot for their last 500 or so tournaments, and really wouldn't provide much useful information, and is highly results oriented. There are certain folks with fantastic records in their db over an inaduquate sample size who I would never pick over certain players who are in the red over that sample size. I suppose when I win the sunday 1m next week and my results go from +7000 over the last 400 tournaments or whatever, to +157,000, I'm all of a sudden a better player.

You can be sure that if you looked at some of the streaks of the best players on Thepokerdb (who have huge sample sizes), they would have runs over a period of x tournaments that were significantly worse than some peoples whole DBs with that x amount of tournaments. So to draw too many conclusions at all without proper context of players with 200 or 300 tournaments is kinda ridiculous.

Again not to make this seem like an explanation for my shittiness on stars, but I have a total of like 500 tournaments on my db, w/ like 30 or more FTs, but I do not consider myself the same player I was 1 year ago... it's not even close. I was pretty much a low stakes breakeven-losing player for a good 300 or more entries on my DB, while now I just about only play $100+ buy ins with a significantly better expectation than when I was playing 10s a year ago.

bonds25 · #**103** 04-18-2006, 01:34 AM

I agree the database is a poor judge of a player but what else do you go from when drafting an unknown player?

tubasteve · #**104** 04-18-2006, 01:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I agree the database is a poor judge of a player but what else do you go from when drafting an unknown player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read their posts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (i.e. search me on 2+2 not pokerdb)

bonds25 · #**105** 04-18-2006, 01:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree the database is a poor judge of a player but what else do you go from when drafting an unknown player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read their posts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (i.e. search me on 2+2 not pokerdb)

[/ QUOTE ]

ive read your posts and seen your database, hope you got something else!

tubasteve · #**106** 04-18-2006, 01:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree the database is a poor judge of a player but what else do you go from when drafting an unknown player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read their posts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (i.e. search me on 2+2 not pokerdb)

[/ QUOTE ]

ive read your posts and seen your database, hope you got something else!

[/ QUOTE ]

o rly? [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

NoXiousNuts · #**107** 04-18-2006, 02:02 AM

Didn't mean to spur a debate with that comment. Was my way of saying I don;t really know anyone all that well and a lottery is as likely to yield a quality team as a draft might.

bonds25 · #**108** 04-18-2006, 02:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree the database is a poor judge of a player but what else do you go from when drafting an unknown player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Read their posts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (i.e. search me on 2+2 not pokerdb)

[/ QUOTE ]

ive read your posts and seen your database, hope you got something else!

[/ QUOTE ]

o rly? [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I do like your new avatar.

Ansky · #**109** 04-18-2006, 02:17 AM

I like tuba better than bonds anyway cause he went nutso for no reason at me once.

And I don't see the necessity to draft unknowns anyway, there should be enough regulars.

bonds25 · #**110** 04-18-2006, 02:19 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I like tuba better than bonds anyway cause he went nutso for no reason at me once.

And I don't see the necessity to draft unknowns anyway, there should be enough regulars.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt go nutso, i took something you said as a personal attack, i may have been wrong, that was awhile back though.