Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroBob
1p0kerboy - Another option:
Or is your methodology for analyzing this all messed up?
The fact that you haven't even considered this as a possibility and just assume that the way you have gone about this HAS to be correct is quite telling I think.
Similar to the 'rigged' whiners who absolutely KNOW that they are playing 'correct poker' yet Stars makes them lose anyway. They completely dismiss the fact that they might not be winners...because they just KNOW that they play correctly and that it's their opponents who play incorrectly.
I find it very likely that you have not gone through this whole analysis process correctly yet you assume that you have done everything right and thus Stars must be putting you in the bottom 1% on the all-in equity thing.
Bob
Usually you're pretty good at analyzing and interpreting people's posts, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here.
I repeated several times that I'm not saying 'Stars is rigged' and you failed to acknowledge that and immediately implied that I said that. Sigh.
You also failed to realize that the main point of my posts were the previous results of not just mine but also several other Stars players. And what brought the topic of us discussing it in the first place was not the sample I posted in the thread, but both samples of which I no longer have due to a crashed hard drive and the results of other players.
Quote:
Similar to the 'rigged' whiners who absolutely KNOW that they are playing 'correct poker' yet Stars makes them lose anyway. They completely dismiss the fact that they might not be winners...because they just KNOW that they play correctly and that it's their opponents who play incorrectly.
Once again I'm disappointed in your analytical ability because this is not only ridiculous far from what I said, it's not even close to the point I'm trying to make.
I'm a pretty decent winner at PokerStars so I'm definitely not whining. I play 'correct' in many spots but I'm convinced that I have leaks and plenty of room for improvement. So this isn't even like that at all.
I run way worse than I'm supposed to in 'all-in' situations. That's pretty obvious. These simulations don't take into account how well you played or didn't play because that doesn't matter. They take the percent of the pot that you are supposed to win based on your actual chances and then compare that number to what you actually won. It doesn't matter if you're getting your money in good or bad.
So I actually think you should look into how this all works before you make yourself a key part of this thread.
I just got to thinking that maybe you don't know how to interpret the PokerEV graphs? I posted only the luck tab and those aren't my actual winnings/loses. I'm not really sure what you know/don't know as far as reading those things but it's pretty obvious that you're doing something wrong.
Quote:
Whatever. I believe that you still play at Stars for whatever reason which I think is pretty odd if you truly suspect that Stars might be placing you in the bottom 1% to have a chance of winning after you get all your chips in.
I'm making money at Stars. I like their VIP program. I like their customer service. I like their software.
I think I'm getting an honest game but I'm not entirely sure.
I don't necessarily think that Stars put me in the bottom 1%. But it's certainly possible.
What catches my attention are the number of regs that run in the bottom x%. That's the point I'm trying to stress here. So please stop spinning what I'm saying into other things.