guess I’ll give you a ridiculous example, imagine someone has never played poker, sits in a 500/1000 game, open jams 100k preflop, gets called, wins with whatever 2 napkins, cashes out, goes and grind 2/5 for a year and loses 75k this way, is this player a winning player?

I think Xenoblade answered well, but it might also be helpful to circle back to what started this conversation, which was that PB was apparently deep in MU at one point - that doesn't mean she is (or isn't) a losing player, but that she was losing over a particular sample. And I notice that when I go back and reread how we got here, Xeno already covered that, so basically...what Xeno said.

as Bill Parcells used to say you are your record. She's a losing player.

If she is actually good one day she won't be one.

The way anyone with a brain defines ‘winning player’ is in terms of EV. We can’t control the cards

How do we know what the cumulative EV of Poker Bunny's hands are? Absolute results, however imperfect, are the only way we can judge it.

Depends on the backer, but most of the arrangements I'm familiar with, when you're in make up, you have to pay that back before you start reaping profits again. Unless the make up is not a large amount relative to the BR.

Out of curiosity how do you know she’s down lifetime? Has she posted a lifetime graph?

And what do we have in this regard? If a single Tweet about being in MU is it, that's far, far beyond "imperfect". But maybe I've missed something more concrete.

yeah I mean if you're going to isolate variables like that, she's guaranteed a winning player based on her online results

Nah, you're too good bro.

When you're debating on NVG, it's all about game selection, innit.

This is the case in many backing deals but it doesn't work out since the player then has no incentive to continue the staking deal. The player will default and it will become a hot mess.

In the Podcast that kicked off this thread, PB mentioned being upset that she is down money playing poker, as this confirms the belief that she only has value as a sexual commodity.

Since the podcast was aired, she has made max 12k playing ACR and lost at least that much playing WSOP events..

Maybe she has been crushing some juicy untracked all Escort side games and up huge, but all evidence points to her being stuck money lifetime in poker.

I happen to come from a place where, if you stiff your backer, you may experience pain that you've never experienced before. Much of the reason I've never engaged in any backing deals. Gets messy.

I'm sure her ACR sessions and her WSOP performance is the only poker she's been playing. Also, we know for a fact she was staked heavily in WSOP as she constantly tweeted about it. And again, if you've lost $100,000 playing high stakes, averaging a win rate of a negative number of big blinds, then win $25,000 at say, $1-$3 with a win rate of a positive number of big blinds and a much larger sample size, are you a winning player? You're still down $75,000 and you're in make up. I'd say you're still a losing player.

After seeing her recent tweet about being second in chips for Venom, I can’t tell if she’s truly:

A. All schtick
B. Batshit crazy
C. Genius
D. Combo of above?

Whatever it is, she seems to be getting people willing to back her.

Well, she finished 2nd in chips after day 1A in the Venom on ACR so that's something. Two mil up top.

You are just lying now to suit your agenda; she tweeted that she was selling action, there's a huge difference between selling action and being staked. She also never tweeted how much/little she was selling so I don't know how you can say it was "heavily" anything.

You want me to prove you wrong again? You want me to post those tweets too? I already burned one guy crispy once, what, are you a masochist or something?

Can I block this guy?

Despite charging markup, all her posted tournament results are min-cashes aside from a $400 buyin where she 10x. Maybe lightning will strike this time.

You go right ahead and fill your obsession with her by digging through her twitter yet again coupled with the hundreds of posts in this thread from multiple accounts.

I'm not sticking up for her, I'm simply posting your inaccuracies.

If Linus goes into this arrangement constantly, then yes, hes a losing player. Thats why its not as simple as + or - EV overall.

If you are a winning player at your local 1/2 casino at 12BB/100 but you also take shots constantly at 5/10 where you lose 5BB/100 then youre a losing player. Its about game selection.

Also you can lose huge at the reg 5/10 game but have some fish 2/5 home game where you win massively. Your EV will be all about how often you get into that home game, not at all about your average EV. We all know how big the edges can be in home games. Personally I have a lower stakes home game right now where people are stacking off in PLO5 constantly with less than nut flush on paired boards, with shitty AA preflop and on the flop with super low equity etc. Those games massively off set whatever winrate I have in the online stakes I play.

Yes, but in this case we know that's not the case. Her backer is a public figure who has more to lose from bad PR/legal trouble than from any dollar amount she burns through. Considering his support of her is not based on any world-crushing poker abilities or results, it seems more like goodwill at worst so I would guess their deals/interactions are very friendly/helpful to PB.

Like the other guy who questioned that she was in make up hell? You do your own research.

Good will? Is that what they call it these days?

Poker Bunny is a better no limit hold'em player than 98%+ of posters in these forums....