Official Stars Regulars Thread - Page 24

MTBlue · #**231** 03-20-2007, 11:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
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?

[/ QUOTE ]

My objection is only to your "win rates are stupid" comment, then your later supporting argument that winrates are stupid because they are objective.

I already stated why I dislike these threads (that's in the second paragraph of one of my earlier posts).

Also I have a small penis.

TheWorstPlayer · #**232** 03-20-2007, 11:07 AM

Oh okay. I'm sure DMing would show your penis to be large. I've already mentioned that I think you're very tough and I'm glad you don't play as much as you used to, LOL. I think I've explained why I think win rate discussions are stupid, so I'll just let it rest. And it wasn't that they are objective that I had a problem with, per se. It was more that since they are objective, they are (relatively) easy to find and (relatively) boring to discuss. You can't really argue about them, since they are so objective. But you can argue and discuss why players are tough using win rate as one, but not the only, measure.

TheWorstPlayer · #**233** 03-20-2007, 12:14 PM

All this winrate discussion made me look back at PT to see if I was really biased by whom I had run hot against. Here are the people I have taken the most money from. Keep in mind that I don't play a lot and that I have not played a large number of hands against any of these people.

Alotofaction
technologic
sweetluvin7
redrooski24
MYNMSGREG
DaEvils
NoTalentTom
Reefypoopoo
DerekJC9954
TheCleaner11
BigTic
strazin
catcher3333
captZEEbo
garompon
Bri-c
tomitivo
LanderD
suckoutqueen
snakekilla88

Are any of these people NOT solid 2+2ers? WTF... where are all the fish?

aejones · #**234** 03-20-2007, 12:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Alotofaction
technologic
sweetluvin7
redrooski24
MYNMSGREG
DaEvils
NoTalentTom
Reefypoopoo
DerekJC9954
TheCleaner11
BigTic
strazin
catcher3333
captZEEbo
garompon
Bri-c
tomitivo
LanderD
suckoutqueen
snakekilla88

Are any of these people NOT solid 2+2ers? WTF... where are all the fish?

[/ QUOTE ]

most of them are not, in fact.

at any rate, the answer to your question here is that the sheer volume of hands you end up playing against 2+2ers and regs is so much higher than the number that you play against fish, becuase tehy bust easy, don't have a roll, etc.

Eagles · #**235** 03-20-2007, 01:01 PM

Strazin is terrible.

Eagles · #**236** 03-20-2007, 01:01 PM

Also TWP if you play 10k hands with someone you can win more money from them than a fish you play 300 hands with.

catcher193 · #**237** 03-20-2007, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
All this winrate discussion made me look back at PT to see if I was really biased by whom I had run hot against. Here are the people I have taken the most money from. Keep in mind that I don't play a lot and that I have not played a large number of hands against any of these people.

Alotofaction
technologic
sweetluvin7
redrooski24
MYNMSGREG
DaEvils
NoTalentTom
Reefypoopoo
DerekJC9954
TheCleaner11
BigTic
strazin
catcher3333
captZEEbo
garompon
Bri-c
tomitivo
LanderD
suckoutqueen
snakekilla88

Are any of these people NOT solid 2+2ers? WTF... where are all the fish?

[/ QUOTE ]

my list is similar, I also think a good portion of the players I'm up against are better than me and players who I'm down on I am better than.

The fish throw money into the community and it basically just gets passed around.

IMO-a lot of the smaller winners will still be winning against like 30%-40% of regulars.

PerDoom · #**238** 03-20-2007, 02:24 PM

I'm up the most against catcher (also the most person I've played against). I'm down the most to TWP.

catcher193 · #**239** 03-20-2007, 02:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I know winrates are supposed to be a taboo subject, but then again so is discussing individual players. Anyways, including only Stars 2/4 and 3/6 players who 6+ table, what do you think say the 10th best PTBB winrate would be? I think the first number would be a 4, but I'm curious what others would predict.

[/ QUOTE ]
man, in there current state simulated over 1 million hands I don't think higher than 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know mang. i'm not saying i'm good, but 4 sounds lowish to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 10th biggest winner, not just runing hot for a month or 3 months, the 10th biggest winner assuming the current state of the games, but simulating those games over an infinite number of hands.
The 10th biggest winner would be over 4 PT BB/100?

I guess that point is kind of dumb because if I 3 tabled, my winrate might double, but hourly would get cut in half.

aejones · #**240** 03-20-2007, 04:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I know winrates are supposed to be a taboo subject, but then again so is discussing individual players. Anyways, including only Stars 2/4 and 3/6 players who 6+ table, what do you think say the 10th best PTBB winrate would be? I think the first number would be a 4, but I'm curious what others would predict.

[/ QUOTE ]
man, in there current state simulated over 1 million hands I don't think higher than 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't know mang. i'm not saying i'm good, but 4 sounds lowish to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 10th biggest winner, not just runing hot for a month or 3 months, the 10th biggest winner assuming the current state of the games, but simulating those games over an infinite number of hands.
The 10th biggest winner would be over 4 PT BB/100?

I guess that point is kind of dumb because if I 3 tabled, my winrate might double, but hourly would get cut in half.

[/ QUOTE ]

thought we were talking about biggest, not tenth. my guess is over infinite hands 7-8 would be the top 2 or 3 and the next five would be around 5-6, then there would be everyone else hovering below 4ish