Quote:
For dsh_spb
OK, let me address the issue of what evidence would
be agreeable.
Firstly I'd go to one of the sites that sells HH's.
I'd buy a few million of these HH's. (Assumption: you trust these sites to provide real, played, hands.)
I'd then process these so that I could rank each player who'd played more than 10,000 hands according to their win rate.
I've actually done this for a few tests as part of other research.
Thank you for seriouse responce.
Could you, please, point me to some of those sites selling hand histories.
Two I've found are pokerftp.com (thanks to Spadebidder) and pokertableratings.
Do you know some more?
pokerftp.com is free for researches, but their hand histories are anonymous
The other sells HH for cash. I sent them email asking if their HH anonymouse or, if they are not, if substitute niknames consistently correspond to real. Only in this case any analyses for identifying winning players make sence. By the way, they charge $175 for 5000 HH. I doubt I can afford several millions of HH.
Quote:
[
One point to note is that the people running the sites know that there are many players with the expertise to perform these fairly simple statistical analysies. This is one reason why I don't think they'd be stupid enough to try it.
If it works the way you proposed, it's a very good point. Same moment I realize its really easy, I'm gonna change "religion".
Quote:
[
I'm sorry I've been taking the p1ss of your posts up to now but you must appreciate that there have been a number of posters who've started off sounding very reasonable but have, when their questions have been answered to the best of our ability, just yelled: 'shill' and stomped off.
Never mind.
Please, note, I never called you a shill. For me it does not matter who is a poster, shill, poker site CEO, or devil. As long as he sounds reasonable.
I would rather prefer CEO as the most dependable source of information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyromantha
The posts you mention are a typical rigtard way of doing statistics. Here is how they function:
The rigtard plays a bunch of hands and notices that he has done badly in one particular area.
............
............
Do you see the difference between doing this, and making the hypothesis first then rolling the dice a million times?
Surely, I see the difference between statistical experiment and statistical analysis based on a biased sample. The latter though theoreticaly possible, needs so enormouse sample size, which is practically unreal for players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spadebidder
Go to pokerftp.com. Download the sample database and software. Create your analysis, and then submit it to run on the billion hand database. You can identify strong vs. weak players using whatever criteria you use to define them, there are many players in the database with tens or hundreds of thousands of hands to clarify their strong or weak grouping. The software will let you index them and then do whatever statistical tests on them you like. You'll need to be able to write java code for your tests.
pokerftp.com claims following:
"We support no opponent profiling policy. Therefore we are taking measures to prevent usage of this database for opponent profiling".
Do you know if it's still possible to identify strong / weak player, even under their fake ID's. It would only be possible if real ID's always correspond to new ones.
You should know for sure if it's possible.
I doubt again (sorry), because (theoretically) in this case I could take those HH, compare to my own HH's, by some criteria identify myself, then by comparison identify my opponents and get them profiled.
Please, respond.