Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]
It will be fun to publicly embarrass you when this guy loses 60k back in a month. He's probably half way there. These quotes will be fun to dig up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he has embarrassed himself enough already [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: DERB
 

BicycleKick hacked my password.

Re: DERB
 

And what about the possibility that poker results do not follow a normal distribution, but rather something with fatter tails. It would make sense that both strongly positive and negative results can feed off themselves, causing tilt in the player or in his opponents.

Re: DERB
 

But he is on Sklansky's top ten smartest list. I wonder how that physics P.H.D. is going?

I like how Andrew points out the he plays "this level regularly and higher."

The obvious translation is that he plays 30/60 and takes shots at the 80/160 game. Which is great and all, but the main posters in this thread, play 1-2 and 150-300 and take shots at 300-600 and higher.

Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]
It will be fun to publicly embarrass you when this guy loses 60k back in a month. He's probably half way there. These quotes will be fun to dig up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe he ever made a statement one way or another about whether the guy was a winner or not, just that some people were speculating rather than running the numbers, and that there were holes in the logic underlying the speculations.

If someone presents an invalid argument that something is true, and that something turns out to be true, it does not suddenly make the argument valid.

Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]
And what about the possibility that poker results do not follow a normal distribution, but rather something with fatter tails.

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter what distribution results for a single hand follow, if you are dealing with sums (or means) of sets of hands those sums or means will follow a normal distribution. (That's just the central limit theorem). So you can say for instance that results from 100 hand chunks will be normally distributed.

Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't matter what distribution results for a single hand follow, if you are dealing with sums (or means) of sets of hands those sums or means will follow a normal distribution. (That's just the central limit theorem). So you can say for instance that results from 100 hand chunks will be normally distributed.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is way over simplified. The sums tend towards a normal distribution, and it could take a long time to approach the point where a normal distribution is a good approximation, especially at the extremes. Add in the possibility that the individual hands in groups of hand results from one player are not independent, and this reduces your effective sample size further. I know this is a lot of conjecture when I haven't worked with the numbers, but it's something to be considered.

Re: DERB
 

who is cypher?

Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]

There is not a 1 in 50 chance that he is good here. I would never cap worse than AJ here on purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my favorite analysis of the hand. Clearly the universe revolves around James, and all players should act accordingly.

- Andrew

www.pokerstove.com

Re: DERB
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

There is not a 1 in 50 chance that he is good here. I would never cap worse than AJ here on purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my favorite analysis of the hand. Clearly the universe revolves around James, and all players should act accordingly.

- Andrew



[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not the world, but I am comfortable with poker discussion revolving around him.