FGators graph thread [modnote: read the end, it's even worse]

[the machine]

[ QUOTE ]
Somebody please, please go play live in AC tonight and hang out with FGators.

[/ QUOTE ]

damnit i was tryin to go to AC for the weekend, or had a hope of it for about 3 hours before i found out it was a bad weekend. what a time to be there

[[Phill]]

FGators,

It seems your analysis of your play comes from an assumption that you are a good winning player.

What evidence do you have to back up such an assumption?

Do you know what the scientific method is?

I quote from wiki:
"Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning,[1] the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses.

Among other facets shared by the various fields of inquiry is the conviction that the process must be objective to reduce a biased interpretation of the results. Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so it is available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, thereby allowing other researchers the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to be established."

The easiest way to prove something is to try and disprove it. So take the assumption:

FGators is a great winning player who only loses because he has an unlucky account on Pokerstars

This statement can be broken up into:

1, Fgators is a great player

2, Fgators is a winning player

3, Fgators only loses because he has an unlucky account on Pokerstars

Statement 1 is almost irrelivent - there is no doubt that you arent a great player relative to the worlds best like BarryG, Doyle, Krantz, SBRugby and so on. You see great is a relative term, but at the end of the day i will throw this out because its all relative and at the end of the day its a qualitative measurement that is often hinged on statement 2 which is more key.

Statement 2 - well, youre down in $ playing cash. I guess i dont need to go on here, you didnt win, therefor youre a lifetime loser. There is the grey area of at what point we consider day zero - if it was 200k hands or so ago you ARE in fact winning - but lifetime at cash your down. This is an irrefutable fact.

Statement 3 - this is the one which your case hinges on. Either Stars can and does have accounts which run unluckier long term or they cannot/do not. Secondly they need to give YOU such an account. We could use Occams Razor to state that given the option of them doomswitching you and letting you run average they would let you run average. I think a solid question here is this:

Why you?

Why has Stars given YOU the "cursed" account? Is it just you, or are there lots of others with doomswitched accounts?

Also, why risk their whole business (if they get found out they will go bankrupt almost overnight im sure you will agree) like this. Surely the fact you play more hands per day than most means they should want you to run good and move up where they can rake you even harder.

Finally, if you truly think they are rigged - why didnt you stop playing there? Sure you can save FPPs for a Porsche, but if you came to this conclusion 1 million hands ago, you could have gone to a site like FTP and at a moderate winrate of 2ptbb/100 you make 8c per hand, or a total sum of $80k in cold hard cash - that is ignoring rakeback and it is ignoring the fact that you will have moved up from 1/2 in that time and you will have increased your earn rate due to your increased experience.

-----

I put it to you that you infact know for a fact that Stars doesnt rig their accounts, you know for a fact that you have been playing bad hence improvements 200k hands ago and an increase in c-bets and i also put it to you that you cannot be deluded enough to think you are truly a great poker player - be it at tourneys or cash.

[dibbs]

[ QUOTE ]
Everyone blabbing about how he is hardheaded or sucks is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly the stupidest thing said in this thread, and that says a lot, in regards to the hardheaded part. I'm at a loss for words really, how can you even say that? Have you read any of his [censored] posts over the past year?

Honestly FGators, you need professional help.

Yea you aren't the prototypical spewey craps hitting gambler, but you are a completely delusional degenerate, and it seems hard to believe that your constant delusions, excuses and denial doesn't negatively effect other aspects of your life and relationships.

Despite the fact your retardedly stubborn replies to those who honestly tried to help you and constant pathetic excuses has made me want to slam my head against my desk in frustration over and over, I really wish you the best of luck in seeking help, and I mean that.

[imozyslow]

[ QUOTE ]
Triumph,

12, for reasons I have stated before (FPPs---> Supernova Elite-->Porsche). I'll stop playing 12 tables on January 1st,2008 most likely.

Well I'm off to Atlantic City to play live, which I usually always win at so, yeah, I'll be back later tonight to see this PokerEV graph if it ever comes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

gators where and what game are you playing tonight? i want to say hello!

[iron81]

I meant "hardheaded in regards to his tactics" because his continued belief that he's doomswitched baffles me as well.

[soon2b]

funny thing is, id say fgators is prob better than the majority posting in this thread. lol.

Fgators,
You arent that bad. You arent good either. Your ability to grind like you do is insane. I suggest you keep playing 1/2 and find someone to help you. You have played so many hands, you should be able to recognize patterns to help your hand reading. Play less tables and actually think about what youre doing and why you are doing it. Good luck

[nath]

iron,

It's sweet that you're trying to stick up for FGators in this thread, but, uh, you're wrong and there's a reason everybody who has logged significant time as a winning player is critical of his play

[Triumph36]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone blabbing about how he is hardheaded or sucks is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly the stupidest thing said in this thread, and that says a lot, in regards to the hardheaded part. I'm at a loss for words really, how can you even say that? Have you read any of his [censored] posts over the past year?

Honestly FGators, you need professional help.

Yea you aren't the prototypical spewey craps hitting gambler, but you are a completely delusional degenerate, and it seems hard to believe that your constant delusions, excuses and denial doesn't negatively effect other aspects of your life and relationships.

Despite the fact your retardedly stubborn replies to those who honestly tried to help you and constant pathetic excuses has made me want to slam my head against my desk in frustration over and over, I really wish you the best of luck in seeking help, and I mean that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll second this, even though I trolled him relentlessly in this thread. Gambling for a living is probably not very healthy for anyone, but least of all someone who harbors these sorts of thoughts - they are a sign of compulsion and ultimately will lead to a bad place, if they haven't already.

[Dids]

iron,

Earlier this week I was trying find examples to make the point that somebody who thought you weren't dumb was wrong.

Thanks!

[sethypooh21]

I don't even play NL that much, but A) FGators is obviously exploitable, even by me, a limidonk. B) he's the biggest loser in $ (by a wide margin) in my 60k hand DB. Coincidence?

Seriously, I don't think I've ever played against someone against whom playing mid PPs is more comfortable. Even OOP.