It's 200 posts of 99% posters that are clearly recreational poker players that do not have any idea about the maths behind the game. And then the rest that have capability of "proving" what they assert, but choosing not to prove it.

If you want to move on, we need the framework, to understand that we cannot accurately assess "effective rake". And I already posted the next "steps". But of course what legs or ground do I have to stand on if we are not collectively smart enough to realize we cannot even determine if a game is profitable or not.

You are daft if you think I am saying that the pros and good players aren't making money. I am pointing out that there is no value measurement mechanism and so that the foundation for all arguments falls through.

You are making fun of me for pointing this out...so I am very fairly making fun of you back.

99% recreationals?

Well the joke is on you. You're a professional in an "unbeatable" game.

So now my advice is not to get a new hobby. Get a new job.

Ha. I made the spreadsheets, I objectively explained the data, I also gave my opinion separately. I also extensively researched and created a solution for the value measurement problem poker faces.

Your failure to read the words, and assumption I am a rando idiot are just that and only that.

Continuing to close ones eyes and claim there are no facts presented is not an argument.

Ah, show me their homework that you claim exists. I have shown mine in the op and other posts with other links and quotations of my blogs/articles.

You just are clearly arguing without even thinking about where you are. You spent your hole day ignoring the actual conversation and just coming back to put up arguments. What in your head causes you to spend energy in such an ignorant state?

If your conclusion is that nobody knows their true ROI. Then it's both not difficult to understand, nor a new revelation.

You don't understand the conversation and you don't belong in this thread, there are a few others who know exactly what we are talking about, but your coming i this thread and pulling your pants down to show your winky to everyone is really embarrassing for all of us.

Its ok if you can't understand, you just need to pull your pants up and go wait outside m'kay?

I am sorry you are having difficulty, but I am having dialog with the 2 or 3 players that are not oblivious to these simple concepts.

I'm sorry but you just aren't going to be able to participate

Pretty delusional to think you're having dialogue with anyone. But I'm happy to sit it out for a few days and watch how this shambles proceeds

You never have to worry about me ridiculing you, as I think that serves no purpose. In fact I have made many posts in this forum questioning the zeal others have at doing so. Anyway, you were kind enough to answer my questions from post 135, so I shall answer yours. You asked me, and I paraphrase, 'Am I strong in math and poker'. I am strong in math, not in poker . I have dual majors in Biostatistics and BioChemistry, spending countless hours utilizing various forms of advanced mathematics. So yes, I feel I am strong in it. As for poker, I am recreational at best. It is a hobby which i have gotten away from since "Black Friday". But I still play quite often at Hard Rock and home games.

One quick note from an answer to post 135.. in particular question 2.

I asked you 'Can someone think you are wrong, and be right?'. You answered no.

I appreciate your honesty, but it is a bit telling and very sad. Honestly, I hope you just misunderstood the question.

I promised you this would be my last response, and I will honor that, so you will never hear from me again in this thread. But before I go, some friendly advice, which you can use or disregard as you please.

ALWAYS go into an argument/debate with your mind open and willing to be changed. Actually embrace the idea for it to occur. The greatest growth you will ever achieve is when you can admit your faults, and correct them. Not saying you are right or wrong in this debate, I am saying your obstinance to alternative theories makes others dismiss you and attack you. While you may not care, it stunts the course of dialogue on the TOPIC you wanted addressed. So your obstinance in essence is holding you back from getting an answer to your question. No one will ever listen to your ideas, if you are unwilling to listen to theirs. Good luck burfoon, I wish you well. Take care.

Thank you.

Ya so you admit you are strong in math and not poker, but the two are very correlated and complimentary aren't they? Countless hours utlitzing various forms of advanced math. Awesome, you should be able to discussion from the 20 profiters and 20 top count players on the leaderboards then exactly what I point out. The reason you cannot is you simply haven't looked. Do you understand what I mean to say because the internet seems to be put a grey box in the middle of us. I mean the data is so obvious if you just look at it you will confirm. Holding your eyes over your head and saying "no i am a Biostatistics major is just embarrassing for both of us."

You ask if someone can that I am wrong and be right. As far as I understand the question you mean to ask is it possible that the 180 field is actually totally profitable in a significant or reasonable way. Or in other words is it possible to measure such a thing.

And I have seen the answer to this and it is not. Or in other words I must contend the sky is blue in the sense we generally mean it, or that gravity exists. The fact that unknowleageable people that have not themselves observed the facts disagree does not lead me to allowing for such a possibility.

If you would suggest that perhaps the sky is not blue then I will agree that there is not a value measurement problem the players face.

No let me be succint and passive aggressive back to you (and also suggest you have done nothing more than take a shot at me and leave before I might have a chance to defend:

It is embarrassing that you especially with your math field cannot recognize this. It only takes a few months of thought in order to observe this throughout the entire game.

Players want me to "prove" this? ha, they need to show me the mechanism that measures these things. Pretending they don't exist because they are too lazy to create them is not a proof is it?



By the way did you know there is an economic/mathematical/software revolution going on? I wanna talk to others about the next evolution of poker but we are busy flinging pooh about how assumption need to be proved wrong before they are false

Can't you see how this might apply to bio statistics? http://bitsharesplayfoundation.org/p...tePaper_EN.pdf

Sorry I did not realise that the OP was your entire work, my apologies.

I assumed it was something better and more relevant.

You came to this thread and got annoyed because you commented without reading through the material and without knowing any of the context.

You have continued this throughout many times.

Recently you finally ask who I even am in relation to the content (I have a significant 180s graph in a thread about the validity of 180s).

Btw it would be helpful if you at least looked up my player profile, not because I think I am awesome, but because context is always helpful.

All that is you participating WELL before you know what the context is. I have been censored everyday in this community for a year for simply pointing out that poker has no value measurement mechanism.

And that I have the solution.

when you get over yourself and finally admit the OBVIOUS truth to this, then we can discuss the solution.

And no its not my ENTIRE works. My entire works about 30% of the remaining 99% of the material you are missing.

Its been pointed out an linked to in this thread. But again the title of it is banworthy as is linking to it...

you remaining clueless, which is fine, maybe its not your fault...but it isn't mine.

Just post your graph man.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...3&postcount=34

Again I only mean to point out I am not a rando. I doubt I could be a moron either, and clearly my play, knowledge, and experience easily trumps most of the posters in this thread.

I maintain:

1) there is not value measurement mechanism for effective rake.
2) 180's cannot be shown to be profitable
3) and the profitability of 180's is largely exaggerated.
4) most staking contracts are now invalid.

In order to suggest they are profitable, for it not to be an assumption it must be proved. Not the other way around.

And finally:

I have the solution for the effective rake mechanism to solve pokers value measurement problem.

Its out biggest leak, and we now have an opportunity to address it, if we can stop the admins/mods from censoring the discussion about profitability of the game, and if we can stop the 99% of recreational calibre players from trolling the conversation between knowledgeable players.

Cliffs: if you are a 180 player and not as skilled as me then you don't make money at the game.

What is your solution?

Your arrogance is astounding if you think grinding for minimum wage makes you a expert then i don't know what to say to you.

if 180s are unbeatable move up stakes where they respect your raises obv.

All that graph says to me is your not good enough at poker to play anything else. You should try mtts sir i heard they are still beatable.

No. 20 pages just to get a bunch of monkeys to admit what is blatantly and simply true. And now in the midst of me being banned and stripped of my identity and posts, and daily berated and censorship since...and all I want to do is present something incredibly profitable to the players. Most of my attempts to click "post" are met with "please refresh" and I must type again, through a terrible vpn style browser. Most posts then get deleted anyways

I won't begin to discuss it until I know my posts on the subject won't be deleted AND most importantly the intelligent players that agree, admit and realize that poker has a value measurement problem help stop the unknowleadable troll players from busting into attack my image.

That should be quite fair in light of the way the community has treated me. I want to post without being treated subhuman, which has gone on for nearly a year.
My arrogance is not astounding but your ignorance to facts and this conversation is. You cannot read anything from my graph, you have no idea what you are doing or what you are talking about. You hear many things and you assume many things..none of which is good poker. Smart people are talking, we are moving to an important conversation. What we ask is that you exit the dialog immediately thank you.

Now...are there those that recognize the obvious fact that poker has a value measurement problem? Do these same players that see this feel that the community deserves to have the dialog that will solve this problem? As poker players should we expect to play in a reasonably profitable game...

or in other words if mtts are profitable, and 180s are not so much, then why should rake not be adjusted accordingly. My conjecture is if you could accurately measure the value of effective rake, then such an "equivalency" would naturally "arise".

http://youtu.be/1ZAvh6eD0xk?t=11s

Cliffs: It has been shown that poker has a "value measurement problem" and such is each individuals players' greatest leak.

And then some bat **** crazy player has declared that they have solved it!

Now we are just waiting to see if there are enough players that understand in order to start the discussion of the presentation of the proposed solution!

Ye you sound like a fun guy at partys. Your more than likely right your alot smarter than me with all this technical gobblydgook. I know a few guys like u talk the best game of poker ever but they can't actually play for ****.

i will exit this high level discussion now as i have no idea about half the terms you are talking about tbh. Some of us just get on with it on the felt instead of moaning about it.

is lag-banning still a thing? Awesome if so

What is effective rake?

Sort of. Players can sort of talk the best game and play for ****. to some degree this can happen, to some degree i am guilty of 'out playing myself'. But whats more important is if we can have a chance to have the discussion about how to fix the leak of "measuring effective rake", then we ALL stand to gain very much.

I do care for this game, in fact I care for all of us. But I cannot mount an argument for us to stand on in the midst of all these unknowledgeable players attacking me.

SOME players are strong enough or stronger than me at the maths, this is true, but they have not applied them and have missed what I have come across (whether by skill or chance matters not).

But many of these players are either bad poker players and/or they don't realize they are talking to a strong and experienced player in a very reg filled field.

If I cannot beat the game, sadly, it means most of you cannot...

However, when the attacks on my character stops, and a few many 3 or 4 regular posters with political pull pick up this conversation and stabilize it (no censoring forboon)...and on the premise we understand and admit pokers value measurement problem...

We can begin to discuss the solution to it.

That's a great summary of this thread.

Remember I will answer you to the best of my knowledge but also try to have you read between the lines to save many essays. I will explain anything in greater detail, but the context is many many posts and elaborate explanations are gone and deleted over the last 12+ months. very sad and very valuable to the community (obv "IMO")

"Effective Rake" is the definition that lays the foundation to counter DNegs that says stars is the cheapest site to play on. Stars has competitive rake as a % but it is the most expensive site play on (now I admit its difficult to measure but measuring stars vs for example party is a lot easier than accurately measuring the 180 field).

So here is the definition:

Effective Rake
So I hope you understand that I have in fact laid this out, and I have already seen the arguments that everyone will give. Hopefully, now, we might open the conversation, first that a few of us agree such a problem exists, then understand the importance of the phrase "effective rake", and then it can lead to the solution to pokers value measurement problem

thank you.

You'll notice the knowledgeable good players have stopped attacking me and making fun of me (and many never did).

You are bad at poker, and we need a few "strong" players, and/or intelligent posters so we might collectively open an important dialog...

would you kindly stop posting in this thread please?