Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
im pretty horny but dont feel like putting in effort to getting laid. i know of one sure thing...shes not particularly good looking. should i wait it out or just go with the very meh-choice?

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.goodkarmafactory.com/site...op-311x322.jpg

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm engaged! Spent my entire BR on the ring!!! jk

I proposed to my gf of 4 years this weekend. Might not be another 2 years before we get married though, I'll probably be starting grad school in the fall & she will be finishing it, but possibly starting law school.

Life = over?

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought you were ghey? not trying to be condescending

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, why did you think that?

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
almost right, it would be .08 x $60, not 55

edit- also it is very important whether rakeback, bonuses etc count towards the total.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently they don't which makes the bet ridiculous. I'd be utterly shocked if he has a 8% ROI 25 tabling the 60's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait why would they it be 4.4 times 60 when they taking the 5 out of the prize pool from everyone. The bet is not including rakeback. That's how rake works right.
I always thought it worked like this. Lets say I played 1 game of the 22+ 2 which is = 24's s at ftp and I have a 10% roi. Isn't it 22 times 0.10 = 2.2 and then you calculate the rakeback so it's 2 times 0.27 = 54 cent. I'm probably a dumb ass [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
almost right, it would be .08 x $60, not 55

edit- also it is very important whether rakeback, bonuses etc count towards the total.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently they don't which makes the bet ridiculous. I'd be utterly shocked if he has a 8% ROI 25 tabling the 60's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait why would they it be 4.4 times 60 when they taking the 5 out of the prize pool from everyone. The bet is not including rakeback. That's how rake works right.
I always thought it worked like this. Lets say I played 1 game of the 22+ 2 which is = 24's s at ftp and I have a 10% roi. Isn't it 22 times 0.10 = 2.2 and then you calculate the rakeback so it's 2 times 0.27 = 54 cent. I'm probably a dumb ass [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


its return on total investment. this includes rake. so a 10% roi at the 22+2s is $2.40. rakeback is done right by you,but it looks like you have a higher roi than you think.

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
almost right, it would be .08 x $60, not 55

edit- also it is very important whether rakeback, bonuses etc count towards the total.

[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently they don't which makes the bet ridiculous. I'd be utterly shocked if he has a 8% ROI 25 tabling the 60's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait why would they it be 4.4 times 60 when they taking the 5 out of the prize pool from everyone. The bet is not including rakeback. That's how rake works right.
I always thought it worked like this. Lets say I played 1 game of the 22+ 2 which is = 24's s at ftp and I have a 10% roi. Isn't it 22 times 0.10 = 2.2 and then you calculate the rakeback so it's 2 times 0.27 = 54 cent. I'm probably a dumb ass [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


its return on total investment. this includes rake. so a 10% roi at the 22+2s is $2.40. rakeback is done right by you,but it looks like you have a higher roi than you think.

[/ QUOTE ] So you get 2.40 per game and 54cent per game?

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a huge believer in the polyurethane now. Sucks they're like $1 each but whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't you married? wtf?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm just passing on some advice I wish I'd had when I was your age. [censored] abstinence only sex education. [censored] biggest waste of time ever.

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

If you are calculating return on investment, it's return on what you spent, so $60, not $55. you can calculate it with or without rakeback. mostly we figure it without, and add in the rakeback as extra.

so, saying 10% roi and 27% rakeback would be the same as saying 12.25% roi including rakeback.

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

Spacegravy would have a better shot 4-tabling the $225s with massive game selection, and just pray he runs super hot.

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone taking any prop bet action against Spacegravy on his challenge?

$25K in 30 days playing $60 STT's... yeah OK

[/ QUOTE ]

When did this happen? It's really going to suck when people start noticing his ATC-ish SB open-shoves. Their spite-calls are going to be close to correct and it's WAY -$EV over the course of the game to shove too wide when the player to your left knows your too-wide range and calls correctly.

Re: OT: [censored] thread, OCTOBER, READ RULES IN TOP POST
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anyone taking any prop bet action against Spacegravy on his challenge?

$25K in 30 days playing $60 STT's... yeah OK

[/ QUOTE ]

When did this happen? It's really going to suck when people start noticing his ATC-ish SB open-shoves. Their spite-calls are going to be close to correct and it's WAY -$EV over the course of the game to shove too wide when the player to your left knows your too-wide range and calls correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not believe that spacegravy will successfully complete this challenge. However, most of his SNG experience is at the $16 level where several of your opponents to the left will be spite calling without even knowing it. Therefore he should be able to adapt his pushing ranges accordingly.