[esch]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How big of a sample is this? Maybe you aren't good enough to beat the games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sample, spample, it's live poker for god's sake which will NEVER be statistically significant.

[/ QUOTE ]

wrong. Your statement goes against 2+2 thinking - of course sample size is relevant for live poker players, go read Gambling Theory and Other Topics for details, or ask the guys in the beginers forum - even they know this statement is wrong. And yes its very obvious from this and past threads that HDL's sample size is too small to judge. Nothing wrong with that, he just has to be made aware of it - any belief that one town is better than another for his game probably means there are other deeper rooted problems that can be adressed in his game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking that the "sample, spample" text was more along the lines of a sardonic comment on the automatic reply of "sample size too small" to anything related to generalizing one's poker ability or one's comment on a poker environment.

I think it's interesting how you like to use the sample size argument on either side - almost to the point of it seeming like it's just to say "I'm right, you're wrong."

(Probably part of a tendency partially innate to moderators. And I know I do it too sometimes - on other topics)

Everyone should just preface relevant topics with "Given the small sample size..."