Its alot funner to have NW thinking that everyone views him as an uncreative nittag. I suppose we could just act like he is on a massive heater and that the longrun will catch up to him eventually. He could be the Doughnutz of tagnits.

you could mock him for being a puss, but numbers don't lie


he has the highest winrate of non HU players here.

that means you don't have the right to mock him, since he is outperforming you

and this isn't 3-6, it's 10-20+

Ok since u seem extra dense today let me elaborate.

Just because he sits in full good games and had the highest WR does not mean that he is the best player on AP.

Notice I am not disputing that he has the highest win rate.

I also am not saying it because I think I am a better 6 max player (although Im certain Im a better sh player).

When I think best player though....it obviously has to be someone who is equally good all around. There are several much better choices than a 6 max specialist, to call one "the best player on AP" is up there with the most laughable statements that you have made.

Get it?

From a profit standpoint this is false, at least from what he claims to be up this yr in his well.

Suppose it depends on ur definition of perform though.

Sidenote

I <3 how your nitness has gotten you no where, so u find it solace in jumping on the **** of a semi nit who has done better.

biker, you are so bitter. wtf


also, i don't think i'm the one people should be worrying about. I'm up 50K this year, and I"m happy with that. I also know you play a billion hands, so I know you are up.

I just think it's ironic how everyone rags on him, and yet, out of all of us, only palo, bayarea, and stewie have won more in the last 4 months. that's all.

Yay me! Not to mention this is only 1 account from 1 site. This doesn't even come close to my total winnings for 08.

(yes, this is a not so subtle brag post).


Oh, and sidenote....weeeeeee, ap regs thread is BACK! ty tableratings.

4 MONTHS?!?!@>

NO WAAAYYY

A LIFETIME!

OBVIOUSLY TELLS ALL

NOT POSSIBLE TO RUN ABOVE EXPECTATION FOR 4 WHOLE ****ING MONTHS....NOPE CANT HAPPEN

opjaspjadsiojdasiojdsaiojiojdfasijdasd


Do you ever consider how stupid you sound? Or does it just not matter?

You are way too emotionally invested in this mntbikr. And yes, it would be nice if they had 500,000 hands on everybody, but you can't completely discount 4 months of data. Statistically speaking, those who are up the most after 4 months are still the ones most likely to be up after 12 months, 24 months, etc.

This site does a poor job of measuring volume of play if you're trying to figure out who has won the most. Im in the minority of poeple here in that i dont have a second active account, which could easily double the volume you see. Some people play a large amount of hands on other sites, while others play strictly on AP. And some people (me) took a long time off, and all the data on there represents about 6 weeks of play.



The accuracy of raw winrates is the least of the problems for using that site as a tool to measure peoples success.

and another thing to consider...

people who are only sitting in full 10/20 and 15/30s and are being selective cant really be in the running for "highest winrate", and it would be really tough for them to be competitive for highest hourly rates.

effective winrates include benefits, and games that are raked higher will tend to understate that. break even at 3/6 and 5/10 can mean as much as 4BB/100 in actual earnings.
and if you're playing indiscriminately, your $/hand will be lower, but hourly will be much higher.

Yeah, what he said.

Also, it doesn't matter. it's like the PK that is 45 years old & accurate but not long. he may still get a job, but he won't get paid like the guy with a leg like a hammer that seldom gets kickoffs returned and can be relied on to kick a 55+ yarder with the game on the line.

"highest w-r" = highest accuracy - but not best player.

It's fun visiting here.

honestly biker, i play 10K hands a week, and i'm bored with it, and this thread was sucking.

that's pretty much my motivation for everything i've said the last 2 days

I'm not sure I like this analogy especially since depending on how accurate the 45 year old is, it isn't clear which kicker we'd rather have. Plus saying things like "highest wr = highest accuracy isn't much of a conceptual help. I think there's a better way of looking at this problem. I'll start by posing a question:

Which business would you rather own, all other variables being equal?

1) A business with a net profit margin of 20% and earnings of $1million per year.

2) A business with a net profit margin of 5% and earnings of $2 million per year.

With everything else being equal, we would pick choice 2) because earnings is all that matters. BB/100 is like profit margin. No matter how pretty that figure is, all that matters is how much a person earns.

So when TheHip41 says this:

He's committing a fallacy because BB/100 cannot be used to gauge performance. At best it is a clue, just as the profit margin of a company may be a clue.

So when addressing Mntbikr15's response to TheHip41's statement:

I would say it doesn't depend. There is only one metric that matters when it comes to performance: Profit. I suspect that Mntbikr knows this, but then he slips up and commits the same fallacy as TheHip41 in his next post:

He cannot know how far TheHip41's nitness has gotten him, since he can only analyze TheHip41's profit margin.

In summary, the only thing we can safely conclude from this website is that Noles321 owns TheHip41.

i agree abba. I'm a perfect example of that. I sit in about 95% of 5-10 games. I mean, if it's me, and 5 players like you, i'll leave, but just put 1 40-15 in there, and i'll play 5-10

10-20+ i'm more picky.

but, to get back on point, i'm a perfect example of this, the four months of me on that website, i'm running at basically even over 110K hands, but I generate so much rakeback and bonuses, I'm up a lot. ILP is up 17K in poker, but I have made a lot more by the fact I play 5x as many hands as he does.


To be completely honest, I know you guys are all good players, and you are making lots of money, just like I am, playing a stupid game.

When NW asked me if I though he was top 5, I couldn't say, because really, who can know. I just know who I think is really good, who I think is good, but with some leaks, and who I think are average regs, then the fish.


biker, sorry if I got you upset, I just wanted to get some excitement in the offically censored AP regs thread.

I know for a fact that if you played more than 5K hands a month, you would be #1 on my friends list.

You know this as well. I run like god against you.

Blah blah blah, keep grinding away at your .07BB/100 nittag.

Hey this reminds me of you.

how is it unrewarding?

i got a car, condo, i work 16 hours a week, and i get to do wtf i want all the time

not a great analogy

It was a joke dude. Of course it's a bad analogy. That's the whole point!

Since you seem slow today here's some cat video's to rev you up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3v8BMNdDvo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V56Ng9cwK4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muLIPWjks_M

Also, for those who wonder why I play so little hands, here's your answer.

all classic cat videos. that cat trying to jump the fence reminds me of adamchambers

I dont like the analogy because it isnt an issue of consistency versus high yield, high risk performance.


it's a matter of different revenue streams.


a better analogy would be the contrast between blue chip stocks where the majority of the yield comes from dividends, versus some start up company where what you make will come in the form of capital gains (which is a reflection of expected future dividends).

http://www.thetoyzone.com/10-of-the-...oys-ever-made/

lmao @

4. Darkey in a watermelon

I think the best estimate of a player's skill is:

total winnings - c*(standard deviation of their total winnings)

where c is some positive constant I haven't determined. You can taylor c to your personal risk tolerances. High c = low risk tolerance; low c = high risk tolerance. This rewards the ability to make a lot of money and do so consistantly.

I think it's pretty much impossible to come up with some kind of agreed upon measurement of a player's skill. All we can really do is come up with an objective measurement of a player's performance. In this respect, the only measurement that's relevant is a player's earnings. Over the next 10 years, if player A has made the most money, then we can objectively say that they have performed the best over this period. Does that mean they are necessarily the highest skilled or made the least amount of mistakes? No. It is possible that they could have a strong work ethic that makes up for their "leaks". In the end all this "Who's the best player talk" just doesn't matter. Show me the money.

right, ILP may be a better poker player than me, but i've made 3x as much as him because I'm not lazy.