|
|
|
|
#1
11-30-2007, 05:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: I win more on weekends in VEgas than weekends in LA.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] How big of a sample is this? Maybe you aren't good enough to beat the games. [/ QUOTE ] Sample, spample, it's live poker for god's sake which will NEVER be statistically significant. [/ QUOTE ] wrong. Your statement goes against 2+2 thinking - of course sample size is relevant for live poker players, go read Gambling Theory and Other Topics for details, or ask the guys in the beginers forum - even they know this statement is wrong. And yes its very obvious from this and past threads that HDL's sample size is too small to judge. Nothing wrong with that, he just has to be made aware of it - any belief that one town is better than another for his game probably means there are other deeper rooted problems that can be adressed in his game. [ QUOTE ] Maybe you should sit down at Hips table and test her skills? [/ QUOTE ] His. 
|
|
#2
11-30-2007, 08:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I win more on weekends in VEgas than weekends in LA.
Aside of the sufficient number of hands issue, another thing may be that OP plays a style that is more suited to the Vegas game. Perhaps he does not adjust his game to table conditions. In particular, I often think that a very aggressive player at the Bellagio $15-30 can run over a table(even more so at the Mirage $10-20). Playing this style at a loose aggressive Commerce $20-40 without premium pf holdings will get you killed. While KJ and that sort of hand is a mediocre hand in the Commerce game, due to fold equity, it can be an extremely strong hand in some of the Vegas mid limit games. As a further difference, it is relatively easy to narrow down the range of many of the Vegas players. Many Commerce players are total random wildcards.
FWIW, I play markedly different styles in Vegas vs. LA and my results in Vegas are good, in LA they are oustanding. I believe that the LA games are more profitable due to the larger amount of dead or near dead money going into pots. But most likely, OP doesn't have anywhere close to a decent sample size.
|
|
#3
11-30-2007, 09:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I win more on weekends in VEgas than weekends in LA.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] How big of a sample is this? Maybe you aren't good enough to beat the games. [/ QUOTE ] Sample, spample, it's live poker for god's sake which will NEVER be statistically significant. [/ QUOTE ] wrong. Your statement goes against 2+2 thinking - of course sample size is relevant for live poker players, go read Gambling Theory and Other Topics for details, or ask the guys in the beginers forum - even they know this statement is wrong. And yes its very obvious from this and past threads that HDL's sample size is too small to judge. Nothing wrong with that, he just has to be made aware of it - any belief that one town is better than another for his game probably means there are other deeper rooted problems that can be adressed in his game. [/ QUOTE ] I was thinking that the "sample, spample" text was more along the lines of a sardonic comment on the automatic reply of "sample size too small" to anything related to generalizing one's poker ability or one's comment on a poker environment. I think it's interesting how you like to use the sample size argument on either side - almost to the point of it seeming like it's just to say "I'm right, you're wrong." (Probably part of a tendency partially innate to moderators. And I know I do it too sometimes - on other topics) Everyone should just preface relevant topics with "Given the small sample size..."
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
