|
|
#31
08-20-2007, 02:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, I know the common wisdom is that it is more difficult to win against good players, but I've never seen any rigorous analysis. [/ QUOTE ] Cool! Following your sound logic, I am joining the NFL. I have sent a letter to the Roger Goodell's office informing him of this fact. I have informed him that I will be playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers and would be quite happy with the NFL minimum salary. And to think, I haven’t played organized football since high school! Then again, I was pretty darn good in HS, and since is no rigorous analysis proving that it is more difficult to win against good players, I should be just fine competing in the pros. Thanks OP! [/ QUOTE ] Where's you analysis? I don't think you have any to offer. You argue by analogy to pro football, but pro poker is rather unlike playing in the NFL. Do you just make football analogies in your brain every time you want to analyze something? I don't think that will get you very far. In financial markets it is well-known amongst successful players that in many types of trading it is more important to understand the "madness of the crowd" than to understand the economics and business of the underlying companies that serve as vehicles for speculation. And the same is true for tournament poker, and plays a role in analyzing player styles and guesstimating ranges and fold equity. There is a very simple theorem in the markets: profit is proportionate to the amount of dumb money in the market. The periods of greatest profit for successful professional traders are during the expansion phases of bubbles. By successful professional trader, I mean someone who knows how to take advantage of others ill-advised risk-taking without exposing himself to excessive risk. This is not easy and is the reason 95% of prospective traders go busto. The same should be true in poker tournaments: there is a positive correlation between the expected profit of a tourney poker pro and the % of bad players in the tourney. However, once again, taking advantage of bad players is not easy, due to variance of results caused by a wide range of styles amongst bad players. [/ QUOTE ] Yikes! Time to punt! 
|
|
#32
08-20-2007, 02:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
[ QUOTE ]
The problem with saying "lol donkaments" at everything is that pretty soon your entire world is one big donkament and then ten years later you wake up with nothing because you never took anything seriously because who can take donkaments seriously. [/ QUOTE ] By god, it's like you totally know me. Has it been ten years already? Where the donk did the time go? My world IS one big donkament, and like this very morning, I did wake with nothing. Is it really becuse I took nothing seriously? Dang me, vanity, pride, and bitter donkness, dang me. Maybe, just maybe, your piercing ray of truth can help to shatter this donkness that has enveloped me. From this day forward, I pledge to view the world and everything in it, as a serious tournament, made up of important choices.
|
|
#33
08-20-2007, 02:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulation
[ QUOTE ]
Under your incompetent overseership, NVG has nothing to do with the high-powered debate tradition of the 2p2 forums of old. Instead it's just one lol donkament after another. That actually would be fine with me, except that you choose to get involved in trashing the few good posts here that someone actually put some thought into. [/ QUOTE ] When you make posts like this, and have a regged date in 2007, it makes me want to figure out who your old account was and why it got banned. Your op is 5000000 words of stupid. Sorry.
|
|
#36
08-20-2007, 03:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Under your incompetent overseership, NVG has nothing to do with the high-powered debate tradition of the 2p2 forums of old. Instead it's just one lol donkament after another. That actually would be fine with me, except that you choose to get involved in trashing the few good posts here that someone actually put some thought into. [/ QUOTE ] When you make posts like this, and have a regged date in 2007, it makes me want to figure out who your old account was and why it got banned. Your op is 5000000 words of stupid. Sorry. [/ QUOTE ] and not to mention a huge waste of time
|
|
#39
08-20-2007, 03:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Skalnsky\'s system said it was, relied upon early capital accumulat
Obviously you don't know the etymology of "Donkament"
Donk = DONK. Duh. 'ament" = Tournament There are more donks in the WSOP ME than any other major tournament. Therefore not only is the WSOP ME a donkament, but it is the king of donkaments. Also, for a reasonable proof: Jerry Yang won this year.
|
|
#40
08-20-2007, 03:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: WSOP ME is not a donkament
In financial markets it is well-known amongst successful players that in many types of trading it is more important to understand the "madness of the crowd" than to understand the economics and business of the underlying companies that serve as vehicles for speculation. And the same is true for tournament poker, and plays a role in analyzing player styles and guesstimating ranges and fold equity.
[/ QUOTE ] This is just another way of saying that some market players believe in martet timing. Since you go on to say that 95% of these people go broke, I'm not sure what your point is, although I suspect you underestimate the percentage of market timers who end up broke. Even if you are right, though, since much fewer than 95% of the market players who pay primary attention to market fundamentals go broke, I'm doubly confused as to what your point is. --Zetack
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
