[MicroBob]

I don't even care about reading his article to be honest.

I might get around to it later if I'm bored I suppose.

I'm sure he just made some errors in his assumptions of what was supposed to happen and perhaps what is a large enough sample for the specific situation he was looking at.


There was a PhD who was supposedly an expert on gambling-theory who said that nobody can beat any poker game because of the rake.
He was quoted in articles about this as a 'gambling expert'.
He said that because of the rake, everybody just passes their money back and forth and loses $3 rake-chunks at a time.

He couldn't even comprehend that some players' skill is so much greater than other players that they can overcome the rake-disadvantage.


Some guy who says he studied 1.3 million hands and has provne that it's all rigged-up doesn't impress me at all.

As somebody noted earlier, it's like some guy arguing that the world is flat.

Some guy comes to me and says that he's proven conclusively with geological evidence that the world is actually flat, therefore there's a big conspiracy around the scientific community where they convinced the rest of the world otherwise.
I say, "Yawn."