|
|
#221
03-20-2007, 01:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
[ QUOTE ]
I disagree that the 'best regulars' should be ranked by win rate. Money per hour is probably the most meaningful measure of 'best player' for a given level. But the guy who grinds out 2ptbb/100 on 20 tables is pretty boring to talk about. And the guy who can win at 10ptbb/100 but only by table selecting like mad on one table on weekends is also pretty boring to talk about. The guys who are interesting to talk about are the guy who take creative lines, are difficult to hand read against, are good hand readers, use position well, etc. If I just wanted to know the results of data mining, I would just data mine. [/ QUOTE ] Most of those 20 tablers don't make 2 pt/bb, they basically breakeven (essentially they are old time "props") and the 2 tablers never log enough hands to be even considered on an objective scale. Funny thing is that often times the people with the best winrates and who have won the most often times have the qualities you described as being a "good player." Find a datamine over a significant data sample and look at the top 5 players, they will be doing interesting innovated stuff that's fun to talk about. A persons individual perception of a player is based on several hundred to several thousand hands. Players mainly attribute the best regs to the people who have ran the hottest against them and the worst regs to the people who have run the coldest. I really don't think these types of threads generate much discussion, other than people bashing other players because their experience differed from other people. 
|
|
#222
03-20-2007, 01:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
Im kingsofcards
Thoughts Just getting back to 2/4 after a weird couple of months. Also from the little ive played over the past couple months I think 2/4 has gotten way softer then it was when online ban first came out.
|
|
#224
03-20-2007, 07:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
[ QUOTE ]
winrate discussions aren't taboo. they're stupid. what would Bld's win rate be in the Stars 2/4 game? Who cares? See why winrate discussions are worthless? [/ QUOTE ] Discussing winrates is no dumber than discussing thoughts on who the top players are - probably less dumb because at least we have something objective rather than opinion. So I find it weird how the first person to post in this thread thinks winrate discussions are dumb. People have posted who they think the top players are. I think I'm better (ie. more $/hr) than almost all of them, so I wanted to know what the top players earn to determine where I stand. Pretty normal.
|
|
#226
03-20-2007, 08:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] winrate discussions aren't taboo. they're stupid. what would Bld's win rate be in the Stars 2/4 game? Who cares? See why winrate discussions are worthless? [/ QUOTE ] Discussing winrates is no dumber than discussing thoughts on who the top players are - probably less dumb because at least we have something objective rather than opinion. So I find it weird how the first person to post in this thread thinks winrate discussions are dumb. People have posted who they think the top players are. I think I'm better (ie. more $/hr) than almost all of them, so I wanted to know what the top players earn to determine where I stand. Pretty normal. [/ QUOTE ] The fact that they are objective is what makes them stupid to discuss. It's more interesting to discuss the tougher players and what makes them tough (i.e. what would allow them to win in tougher games against tougher opponents). Who cares who fillets the fish on the most tables by set mining?
|
|
#228
03-20-2007, 09:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
These are all true
|
|
#229
03-20-2007, 10:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] winrate discussions aren't taboo. they're stupid. what would Bld's win rate be in the Stars 2/4 game? Who cares? See why winrate discussions are worthless? [/ QUOTE ] Discussing winrates is no dumber than discussing thoughts on who the top players are - probably less dumb because at least we have something objective rather than opinion. So I find it weird how the first person to post in this thread thinks winrate discussions are dumb. People have posted who they think the top players are. I think I'm better (ie. more $/hr) than almost all of them, so I wanted to know what the top players earn to determine where I stand. Pretty normal. [/ QUOTE ] The fact that they are objective is what makes them stupid to discuss. It's more interesting to discuss the tougher players and what makes them tough (i.e. what would allow them to win in tougher games against tougher opponents). Who cares who fillets the fish on the most tables by set mining? [/ QUOTE ] Poker Elitism?? Or is this some sort of bulls**t artsy idea that the objective doesn't truly describe quality and that quality can only be understood in a subjective context? (Poker as abstract art?) Btw Set mining isn't the most effective way to get a fishes cash anyhoo.
|
|
#230
03-20-2007, 10:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Official Stars Regulars Thread *DELETED*
Dude, if the people with the highest win rates are ALSO interesting to discuss, then go right ahead. All the people listed as being 'good' in this thread have high win rates. But (and this is only from my perspective) it is not interesting to discuss people ONLY because they have high win rates. There might be people who grind out a lot of cash but whom are not at all difficult for a thinking player to play against and whom only win by playing long sessions, playing lots of tables, and/or game selecting well.
I don't understand your objection. Is it that no one has posted DMed stats to objectively identify the biggest winners? Maybe that's because no one has them or the people that do don't want to share their info. Or is your objection that you think there are big winners who have interesting game who aren't being discussed? Why don't you bring them up then?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
