Quote:
What does it tell us when David's stacksize is usually in the lower half? In other words, amongst the remaining players, he usually has a below average stacksize.
Now this doesn't imply that overall this style has a below average expectation, because we must not forget there are other guys who busted out already, but it certainly tells us that he doesn't exactly accumulate chips like crazy.
Recency bias, sample size error, and typical MTT expectation. He doesn't go crazy during the re-buy period, and if his average finish is 20th out of 100 (which is very good), he would be expected to be below average after X# of bustouts until settling in to his 20th place expectation.
Quote:
Last but not least, we shouldn't forget that he only has a below average stacksize until he busts out. In that case he has nothing to show for and unfortunately it seems to happen quite often before he reaches the bubble. While this is obviously only a small samplesize, it's clear that he is currently losing money and that probably at a rather alarming rate.
Even if true, you haven't provided an argument for why, and you basically contradicted yourself in this paragraph.
Quote:
He did in fact have two final table appearances, but they both came from tournaments that he didn't stream through early and middle stages. Now isn't that weird? It somewhat reminds me of the Invisible Boy from the movie "Mystery Men", a superhero who could only become invisible if nobody was looking.
Considering he bets horses during his streams, you can't imagine that he plays poker when he's not streaming?? Edit: I misread. It's possible he plays worse when the camera is on, but it would take years to determine.
Quote:
Anyways, in my humble opinion he should just play Sit&Go's. They don't take as long and they aren't that much of a longshot, so he gets a bigger samplesize and stable results much faster.
SNGs aren't as fun to play, or watch. It's not far-out to suggest he's not playing for the money (in totality) either
.