i just analyzed my 25/50 results for this year

[sledghammer]

Ok, this 'analysis' is only one part of how you run. If every one of these hands pete had AA vs. AK, this program shows him running horribly, but he actually made money, thanks to all the setups. If we know that total pot size was 100k, his equity was 68k and he won 49k, then he basically broke even, yet he can claim to be running in the bottom .5%. We can assume that he lost money because he made the post, but .5% doesn't mean as much as he thinks it does.

The other point is that if this was a 1k hand sample, then everyone here has run in the bottom .5% at one point. We just don't post about it.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
Ok, this 'analysis' is only one part of how you run. If every one of these hands pete had AA vs. AK, this program shows him running horribly, but he actually made money, thanks to all the setups. If we know that total pot size was 100k, his equity was 68k and he won 49k, then he basically broke even, yet he can claim to be running in the bottom .5%. We can assume that he lost money because he made the post, but .5% doesn't mean as much as he thinks it does.

[/ QUOTE ]

i don't see why you think my expectation or how good/bad i ran in terms of starting hands has anything to do with this .5%. it means exactly what i think it means.

i also ran bad with starting hands. i only got AA 5 times, KK 8 times, QQ 5 times, and JJ 3 times. but that's all irrelevant.

[ QUOTE ]
The other point is that if this was a 1k hand sample, then everyone here has run in the bottom .5% at one point. We just don't post about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

a) that's not true, there's tons of people here who havent experienced running in the bottom .5% over 1k hands
b) i'm not taking some 1k hand sample out of a million hands. these are all the hands since i started playing at 25/50.


also, what is the point you're trying to make? i haven't exaggerated or misrepresented any stats, but you seem to think this is some conspiracy or some [censored] when i have no reason to exaggerate or misrepresent.

[Moonshine]

more posts about shortstackers losing lots of money plz

makes me oh so happy

[Triumph36]

[ QUOTE ]
more posts about shortstackers losing lots of money plz

makes me oh so happy

[/ QUOTE ]

[THE JUICE]

10 BB freezeouts yo?

[sledghammer]

This is my point: I could take any 50k hand sample from any player and find a 2k section which was the bottom .5% by some criteria. You ran at -10ptbb over 1700 hands, while admittedly playing bad, and consistently getting all in with the worst of it, then cherry picked an analysis that claimed you were having a horrible once in a lifetime bad run, which is ridiculous.

P.S. I am a huge stats nit with nothing better to do, so don't take it personally.

[Evigt_Drabbad]

the money u didnt win

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
This is my point: I could take any 50k hand sample from any player and find a 2k section which was the bottom .5% by some criteria. You ran at -10ptbb over 1700 hands, while admittedly playing bad, and consistently getting all in with the worst of it, then cherry picked an analysis that claimed you were having a horrible once in a lifetime bad run, which is ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

i cherrypicked nothing. i ran exactly one analysis, and it just so happens to be the only kind of analysis that is mathematically feasible. whether i played bad or not has absolutely nothing to do with how i ran after all the money went in.

also, if you're playing against players with a clue (and a lot of the people at 25/50 have a clue), it's expected that you'll get all in with the worst of it more often than not. but that has nothing to do with anything.

if you claim i'm cherrypicking - come up with some way to analyze how you're running (shortstacking) that's more accurate than my method, but is also at least almost as simple.

do you really think i ran a bunch of analyses and picked the one that made my results look the worst?

[ QUOTE ]
P.S. I am a huge stats nit with nothing better to do, so don't take it personally.

[/ QUOTE ]

i can tell that you're a stats nit. i understand why you make all the arguments you do. but i'm also a stats nit and i would never waste my time running this analysis if it wasn't perfectly reasonable from a statistical point of view.

you clearly have a basic understanding of statistics, but you're overapplying the [censored] you've learned about bias and all that fun stuff.

[greg nice]

did you calculate your A4 open push on button that sucked out vs my AK?

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
did you calculate your A4 open push on button that sucked out vs my AK?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes