Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneWill
22,500 hands after the hundred games total. Imo That is still a small sample.
Couple of thoughts: for live play, that's a decent sample size IMO. Sure, it's debateable, but again, it's not nothing. It's surely something. We can debate the confidence level.
The next thought is that this is NOT a
winrate problem. The reason people need a ton of hands to try to estimate a winrate is because they are trying to gain confidence from ONE, specific number. The requirement to determine if someone is simply winning or losing is not nearly as rigid.
This is a question of what % of people make money. That's it. Not the exact winrate % for a given player. I don't think the sample size needs to be incredibly big to have an idea of what % of people usually profit.
After 22,500 hands of live play, I think for any one player, we can say with confidence that they are either a winner or loser. That's the only question that has to be answered: winner or loser.
I mean, damn, all these people throw number guesses out of their ass and that's ok and I come along with actual data (numbers pretty close to the little industry data we have) and I get the third degree? Heh, mmmkkk I guess