![]() |
|
#331
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
I do doubt the validity of the HU results. BR numbers do not lie. And the second data miner has fewer 50/100 hands than g2cu. How do you account for that? Similar to the 'missing 7 hands' it doesn't make sense and needs an explanation. [/ QUOTE ] Dude, the two independant dataminers results ARE INDENTICAL. The second guy didn't mine the HU hands but the 6max are exactly the same. The explaination is that these two sets of data are accurate, and G2CU's is not. EDIT : If you want to turn this over to an impartial judge to decide the winner of the bet based on the evidence I have no problem with it. |
|
#332
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I do doubt the validity of the HU results. BR numbers do not lie. And the second data miner has fewer 50/100 hands than g2cu. How do you account for that? Similar to the 'missing 7 hands' it doesn't make sense and needs an explanation. [/ QUOTE ] Dude, the two independant dataminers results ARE INDENTICAL. The second guy didn't mine the HU hands but the 6max are exactly the same. The explaination is that these two sets of data are accurate, and G2CU's is not. [/ QUOTE ] They are identical but incomplete and cannot be checked against g2cu's stats without more information, which I'm trying to get (have sent PM to highstakes.nu). |
|
#333
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
EDIT : If you want to turn this over to an impartial judge to decide the winner of the bet based on the evidence I have no problem with it. [/ QUOTE ] I wouldn't object, although I'd prefer to wait to see if we can get some more information first as I think that will help to true up the various PT stats. |
|
#334
|
|||
|
|||
|
Looking at G2CU's stats closer, I see that the HU data he has at 50/100 is identical to highstakes' stats, so no disputing his HU results.
Highstakes' HU data is identical to G2CU's Highstakes' 6max data is identical to the new dataminers G2CU's 6max data has 7 less hands and has him winning 10K more than the two independant dataminers who's results are identical. It's over, this is proof. |
|
#335
|
|||
|
|||
|
What is incomplete?
|
|
#336
|
|||
|
|||
|
El D has expressed to me that he's willing to decide the outcome of the 1K bet based on the evidence at hand, and i'm sure we could rope a few more respected members of the board into acting as a psuedo-jury. This is acceptable to me, please let me know if/when it is to you.
|
|
#337
|
|||
|
|||
|
TWP, Rolen:
Just got a PM from Rolen asking that. I haven't checked this thread in a while. Catching up now. I nominate Dean as a second of three or five person panel. |
|
#338
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
El D has expressed to me that he's willing to decide the outcome of the 1K bet based on the evidence at hand, and i'm sure we could rope a few more respected members of the board into acting as a psuedo-jury. This is acceptable to me, please let me know if/when it is to you. [/ QUOTE ] I'm fine with that. But we should each clearly lay out our evidence in support of our position in one place. |
|
#339
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm fine with that. But we should each clearly lay out our evidence in support of our position in one place.
[/ QUOTE ] Agreed. Since it doesn't seem like we will be able to resolve this ourselves, this is the only way. |
|
#340
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
I'm fine with that. But we should each clearly lay out our evidence in support of our position in one place. [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. Since it doesn't seem like we will be able to resolve this ourselves, this is the only way. [/ QUOTE ] OK, I'm fine with Dean, El Diablo, and one other impartial. Matt Flynn? He's smart, fair, and has been completely uninvolved in the controversy. If you object, nominate someone else... |
![]() |
|
|