100k hands.... open for inspection/selection/detection/interjection - Page 11

RUDIKULOUS · #**101** 09-26-2007, 05:52 PM

I can't remember if we talked about table selection, but that seriously upped my winnings so much this summer. I just avoid tables with > 3-4 regs unless there's a real drooler. It's just hard to make money off other regs when your edge is ~0.

MyTurn2Raise · #**102** 09-26-2007, 06:24 PM

fantastic post by AJFenix just bumped in MSNL
it hits on what I was saying and might be a fantastic read

carrotsnake · #**103** 09-26-2007, 06:26 PM

OPEN YOUR EYES, THERE BE SHORTSTACKERS IN YOUR GAMES

MyTurn2Raise · #**104** 09-26-2007, 06:33 PM

lol... i thought my advice was pretty good in this case

come on... I'm trying to be a good participant in the forum
am I not allowed to post anything anymore?

I do beat SSNL playing fullstack as well

carrotsnake · #**105** 09-26-2007, 06:36 PM

I'm joking around, but its still fun to bug ss'ers [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

dtf13 · #**106** 09-26-2007, 06:55 PM

86o should not be a red number. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Nick Royale · #**107** 09-26-2007, 07:26 PM

I don't think people saying 100-200k hands means nothing in terms of winrate have a clue about statistics. If you have you're welcome to prove me wrong.

Jay Riall · #**108** 09-26-2007, 07:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think people saying 100-200k hands means nothing in terms of winrate have a clue about statistics. If you have you're welcome to prove me wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

They obviously mean something, but people who think they have a 'true winrate' which they will maintain within 1-2 points in the future are seriously misguided. You're welcome to prove me wrong though. You realize cts has been breakeven over 100k hands before and has also run at 10ptbb/100 over the same sample in the same games?

Louis Vuitton · #**109** 09-26-2007, 07:38 PM

OP, i guess u have tilting problems?

catalyst · #**110** 09-26-2007, 07:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think people saying 100-200k hands means nothing in terms of winrate have a clue about statistics. If you have you're welcome to prove me wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

They obviously mean something, but people who think they have a 'true winrate' which they will maintain within 1-2 points in the future are seriously misguided. You're welcome to prove me wrong though. You realize cts has been breakeven over 100k hands before and has also run at 10ptbb/100 over the same sample in the same games?

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt this is in NL200 games, where variance is exponentially lower than nosebleed stakes