The Well: curtains 3/2/07

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Should I quit poker? ($16s)



[/ QUOTE ]

Nope just study hard and maybe try a new game for a bit.
Its only 250 tourneys!

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to get back to some poker, but as sitngos are solved nowadays I would like to know how to approach situations in which two or more players have less than 3-4 BB.
E.g. blinds 300/600, 50 ante
UTG 5500
Button 1700
SB 4600
BB (hero) 1700
For some magical reason you know that UTG shoves with exactly 50% of all hands. SnGPT tells me to call with 31.8%, but I think that is far too tight. What is your calling range and how do you figure it out?

P.s.: awesome well and thanks for doing this!

[/ QUOTE ]


I agree that it's probably too tight. It's almost impossible to figure out exactly what to do in these situations, but just realize that when you are the tiny stack, the 2nd smallest stack is rather unlikely to put their chips in with a marginal hand. SO you will often end up in a situation where you are forced allin in 3-4 hands.

I dunno, its hard to explain but I would call looser than 31% if I knew that was UTG's range. But okay, not much looser I guess....It's just that you know if the folding game continues you are going to be allin first, with no guarantee of having a better situation occur on that hand.

Completely unscientific I know...

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

No I havent ever considered this. I don't work hard enough on chess by myself right now. If I studied many hours a day it might make sense to get trained by some great players. But without putting in your own serious work, I feel its a total waste of time and money. There are no shortcuts to getting better at chess, it requires lots and lots of hard work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Was saying that the training/exposure could act like an osmosis again... Found that hanging around with stronger players, while not a shortcut, does speed up the process if you let it... kinda like you're learning it right at a higher level etc... If you're willing to put in the heavy lifting

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I just think that one should show some serious dedication first before doing something like that.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
lol, my question got a whole new topic going. The reason I asked is because to be good in chess you have to be a genius, To be a GM anyway. Like how many GM's do you know of average intelligence.

Also, Curtains how good is Josh Waitskin and do you think you have an edge over him?

[/ QUOTE ]


1. You don't have to be a genius to be a GM at chess. It helps but the key is probably to just have a specialized talent, start young, and work hard.

2. I think I'm probably a slight favorite over Josh because he hasn't played in a while....I am more into chess now than him, even though we are both not playing that much. At our peaks I would say we were close to even. We played a bunch of games in the last 5-7 years and had an even score. I refuse to count the game when I was like 12 and he was 15 and already 2300.

[Young_Rodney17]

Curtains did you get a college degree? did you get good grades in school?

[terrellk11]

[ QUOTE ]
Terrell,
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you but your doing a very poor job of arguing.

Intelligence, and happiness are very ambiguous and have different meanings for different people. However you're begging the question, you define intelligence and happiness in your own terms and then use that definition to prove your argument.
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't the guy with the 2.0 GPA getting drunk and laid every night by a different chick and loving every second of life and who is therefor very intelligent using your personal definition be much "more intelligent" than the 3.8 GPA bookworm that doesn't go out and has no social life?


[/ QUOTE ]
This is just a poor argument what if I had 2.0 gpa but I didn't like getting drunk and banging girls. I liked fighting crippled people and doing heroin. If that's what made me happy would I be more intelligent than the bookworm? What if learning made the bookworm happy? What if for the bookworm reading a great book made him enjoy every second of life?

While you see the person going out drinking everynight and sleeping with a lot of girls as someone loving life to others he could be one or many of the following.
Sex addict
Alcoholic
Adulterer
Sexist

While he maybe enjoying life some people would see him as morally bankrupt which is not something typically associated with intelligence. (Although FWIW you could argue pretty easily that morals have nothing to do with intelligence)

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't defining intelligence as having anything to do with happiness. Curtains started this topic with the claim (paraphrasing here) that there is a correlation between GPA and intelligence. He later said (again paraphrasing) that one of his definitions of intelligence was the ability to be happy.

What I was trying to point out (poorly as I was in several tourneys at the time) with the example I gave is that this definition of intelligence as being connected with the ability to be happy weakens his claim of a correlation between intelligence and GPA. Someone can have a 4.0 and be utterly miserable while someone else can have a 2.0 and be the happiest man alive. Which is more intelligent using Curtains two different claims (that GPA correlates to intelligence but that part of intelligence is the ability to be happy)?

Using a more traditional definition of intelligence, there certainly is a valid argument that there is a correlation between intelligence and GPA. However, that's only true when all other factors are balanced out. If two people put in the same amount of work, have the same amount of extracurricular activities, the same jobs, identical personal issues to deal with, and dozens if not hundreds of other factors are balanced to negate their relative impacts and one student has a higher GPA than the other, then yes, the one with the higher GPA is probably more intelligent. But the reality is different.

Student A isn't very intelligent but has his school paid for by his parents, doesn't have to work a job, doesn't date, doesn't join any clubs or play any sports and can devote all his energies to his grades.

On the other hand, Student B is absolutely brilliant but comes from a poor family so he has to work 20 hours a week to help pay his way through school while covering the rest of the bills with student loans (causing lots of stress as he wonders how he will pay those loans back). He plays football (nonscholarship) and actively participates in several clubs. He has a long-term girlfriend (and we all know that takes up time) and hobbies. He recently had a death in the family. He has cancer. And he plays poker.

Is Student A more intelligent than Student B because he gets a better GPA?

Now this is obviously a very extreme example - intentionally so - but it is intended to show that there are countless factors that can lead to variations in GPA and the vast majority of them have nothing to do with intelligence.

Having worked in the Admissions office while in law school as part of my work study for financial aid, I've read hundreds of applications for prospective students and reading their files you can spot the countless aspects of their lives that influenced their GPA. My wife is also the Senior Associate Director of Graduate Admissions of a major Boston business school, so she deals with this exact question several dozen times a day.

In the end, it comes down to this:

Would I agree that there is SOME correlation between intelligence and GPA? Yes. But I believe it's a very small component of the total equation and would say it's effect is often trivial by comparison to the others.

[fluorescenthippo]

curtains,

lvl2, bb is 30, all even stacks, folded to you in CO with 55 or KQ. whats your play?

and what about on button?

i believe bigjoe and z32 at least in their videos limp here. thoughts on limping vs raising?

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
Curtains did you get a college degree? did you get good grades in school?

[/ QUOTE ]

No degree, quit after 2 years to play chess.

My grades were pretty much good in high school and grade school when I liked my teacher or really needed my grades to be good. So basically that means I had some good report cards, and some report cards I tried to hide from my parents [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

In college I decided I wanted to get good grades and got all A's my first year (ok ok got one B). Something about it just made me want to do better. Slacked off a bit my second year, and got more B's and then left school.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
curtains,

lvl2, bb is 30, all even stacks, folded to you in CO with 55 or KQ. whats your play?

and what about on button?

i believe bigjoe and z32 at least in their videos limp here. thoughts on limping vs raising?

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually raise. I dunno limping shouldn't be terrible, but I tend to raise.

[curtains]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Terrell,
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with you but your doing a very poor job of arguing.

Intelligence, and happiness are very ambiguous and have different meanings for different people. However you're begging the question, you define intelligence and happiness in your own terms and then use that definition to prove your argument.
[ QUOTE ]
Wouldn't the guy with the 2.0 GPA getting drunk and laid every night by a different chick and loving every second of life and who is therefor very intelligent using your personal definition be much "more intelligent" than the 3.8 GPA bookworm that doesn't go out and has no social life?


[/ QUOTE ]
This is just a poor argument what if I had 2.0 gpa but I didn't like getting drunk and banging girls. I liked fighting crippled people and doing heroin. If that's what made me happy would I be more intelligent than the bookworm? What if learning made the bookworm happy? What if for the bookworm reading a great book made him enjoy every second of life?

While you see the person going out drinking everynight and sleeping with a lot of girls as someone loving life to others he could be one or many of the following.
Sex addict
Alcoholic
Adulterer
Sexist

While he maybe enjoying life some people would see him as morally bankrupt which is not something typically associated with intelligence. (Although FWIW you could argue pretty easily that morals have nothing to do with intelligence)

[/ QUOTE ]

What I was trying to point out (poorly as I was in several tourneys at the time) with the example I gave is that this definition of intelligence as being connected with the ability to be happy weakens his claim of a correlation between intelligence and GPA. Someone can have a 4.0 and be utterly miserable while someone else can have a 2.0 and be the happiest man alive. Which is more intelligent using Curtains two different claims (that GPA correlates to intelligence but that part of intelligence is the ability to be happy)?


[/ QUOTE ]

As I said, it's very possible for someone with a 2.0 GPA to be smarter, happier or whatever than someone with a 4.0 GPA. The only thing I argued is that absent any information about the two people aside from their GPA, if you were forced to bet that one of them was smarter than the other, you'd be an idiot if you didn't bet on the one with the higher GPA.

This is completely clear, and nearly irrefutable. Don't forget you know NOTHING else about these people aside from their GPA. How there have been paragraphs and paragraphs of counterarguments I have no idea. Yes I understand that you don't think it's that important. This is irrelevant. As long as its even fractionally important, then you should always assume that it's more likely for someone with the higher GPA to be more intelligent, absent any other information.


I tend to think it's more important than you, but I don't begrudge you your opinion, because I'm really no expert on the subject.