[Mike Kelley]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His style is so high variance that he very well could be a donkey most of the time when his bluffs don't work, but the variance in large field donkaments is so ridiculously high that the chance of him ever getting a good enough sample to say if his style is optimal or even profitable is slim to 0. but lucky for him he ran good on a couple of donkaments and has the lack of a life to grind out that many FPPs so now he is sponsored and famous.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Seriously are there still people who don't understand that this is the backstory of almost every TV or big donkament pro???

EDIT: I'll continue my rant, cuz this really gets under my skin. You are saying we shouldn't bash him because his high variance style looks bad sometimes. Your statement contradicts itself. If his style is that high variance it is just as likely that when he actually wins he is just running like god as it is likely that when he looks like a donk he's just running bad. Do you realize how many people use his style of blind aggression?? Do you realize the % of them that will never make a big final table? The % of them you will never hear about that play the WSOP or EPT the same way? How many big 5k-10k events are there a year? Less than 100? These players get the glory because when they run good their chipstacks tend to swing in a much more dramatic fashion. Is he a complete donk? Probably not. Does the fact that he was successful in a small sample of high variance events using an extremely high variance style make him a great player above being berated in BBV? Absolutely [censored] not.

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You let something in BBV get under your skin, and if he was a complete donk he wouldn't of lasted long enough to win a porshe with fpp points.