Hey everyone, Im just wondering if anyone has taken this test?

www.donkeytest.com

If so Im curious to know how accurate you guys think it is. The reason for this is because I have taken the test several times and have gotten a score of about 85 each time. I found this kind of funny because it said that I am expected to lose in all games.

When I took it the first time I was distracted and not focusing that much, so I didn't really put much stock in it. But the second time I took it I got A LOWER SCORE! I stayed focused and did the test through, answering all of the questions to the best of my ability. But back to the reason why I found this hilarious.. I clean house in the lower no-limit games, and make a great profit.. have read a good amount about poker and even do pretty well in the higher no-limit games. But it thinks that I am expected to lose in all games!

The sheer stupidity of this is beyowd me, as when I did the test again and chose all random answers it gave me a 95! It considers me choosing random answers better than me focusing on it completely through! I have searched the net a good bit trying to see how well this test stacks up in other peoples opinions and the overall view seems to be that it is suspect at the least.

I have heard stories about great players getting horrible scores and vice versa, but the bottom line seems to be that it is of questionable reliability. Im curious to know what most people over here at 2+2 think and it would be great to see a consensus on this thing.

In summary I'd like to state my personal opinion that this test is trash, and go from here to see what everyone else has to say about it.

- Coro

search the forums, it's been dissected in great detail, more than once I think.

here we discuss each question

I've taken in two or three times, always ending up in the "low stakes winner" catagory or the "will lose slowly in raked games" catagory. I don't know how accurate it is. I know that a lot of different level players seem to get a variety of results. To do well on this test I think you need to legitimately know the mathematics behind holdem backwards and forwards. I feel like its the kind of test where if you get a high score, you're a good player, but if you don't get a high score, that doesn't mean that you're not a good player. If that makes any sense.

Thanks for the posts, and trust me when I say I have SEARCHED a whole lot about this site, "I get frustrated easily when things turn out to be mest up in some way".

But all the posts usually just talk about there scores, yada yada ya. Im trying to see what most people think once and for all about this test, and if anyone has any insight as to why me "And a number of other players got royaly screwed on are scores when we do pretty well in games", I'd like to know.

Thanks again.

Test takes a while.

I rate this test as being better than my rock-bottom expectations...for whatever that is worth.

I scored 106

The link I posted has a pretty thorough treatment. Are you really asking a question or do you just want to rant? I doubt you'll ever get a once and for all in a forum.

Perhaps the test is aimed at games that are not exactly like the "lower no-limit" games you've tuned your strategy towards. As I mention several times in the thread, the way I'd play a hand at 10NL is not how the testwriter wants us to play.

Please calm down good sir, I simply asked a question and stated my opinion. No need to be rude, "Are you really asking a question or do you just want to rant". All I inquired about was whether or not people that have taken this test thought it was accurate or not. I have not looked through the entire forum you linked to because it was simply to large, "I looked through about 25% of it". I also did a search myself and came up with nothing of the sort that I am asking about.

Thanks for the advice and if anyone has some interesting info that can be shared that would be great.

So anyone have anything they would like to contribute? I'd be grateful.

Thanks.

the reason why it is not an accurate test of how good of a holdem player you are is because it purposely puts you into a bad place and then you're supposed to think of the best line from there.

if you were a good winning holdem player, you wouldn't have put yourself in that difficult position in the first place. the reason why some good players do not score well is because they have rarely encountered those tough spots b/c they have avoided it preflop or on the flop.

this is why i believe a good LAG player will do well in that test while a good TAG player may or may not. the LAG player has tons of experience playing in marginal, difficult situations and knows the line to take. The TAG player would never have been there and doesn't need to know.

You would have to send me some sort of compensation before I took the time to explain to you how wrong you are.

I am calm. I'm merely saying that if you want opinions about the donkey test, you'll find tons of that just in the one thread I linked to. I'm not sure how that helps you though.

Please look at your own posts and imagine how they might be interpreted as "boo hoo, my score is low! The test just sucks, doesn't it? doesn't it?"

Now, I did try to answer your question -- why your score might be low despite being a winning player. Here's the answer to the next one -- have people taken it and is it accurate? Yes, many of us have, and it's just a multiple-choice test. It's only a general indicator, not the final word.

That said, I think you'd do well to read through the full discussion, looking at the individual questions and finding out why the test writer has a different solution from yours. While this may not change your mind about how to play the hand, it will probably give you another perspective. Yes the test is somewhat well written. The "correct" answers have sound logic behind them, in most cases.

I understand that but all Im saying is that if it can be proven wrong, "Which in my case it has" then it needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Ironically this is a type of IQ test where you are actually able to know how well designed it is because of the obvious results, i.e whether your winning or not.

Its interesting to also note that this same test by the way, is also almost certainly, "Or they just plain copied it" exactly the same as the one found at www.iqtest.com, which is of course not accurate. I have taken dozens of online IQ tests and have spent months researching the field so Im quite sure I know what Im talking about. (Its up to you whether or not you want to believe me).

I am not whining, and I ask you to please stop with the insults. There is no reason for them. As I will say again I simply wanted to get a general and well put together consensus on this site. Thats all I was vying for.

Thanks again for all the replies everyone, and I hope the poll gets a reasonable amount of people, so we can see how this site ranks once and for all.

- Coro

Anyone else have anything they'd like to bring to the table?

Thanks

If anyone has any info on how the test works or the way in which it judges your score, that would be helpful. Or if anyone just has their opinion to share, that would be appreciated to.

Regards,

- Coro

Mystery solved.

How the hell is that mystery solved? No the mystery has not been solved, I simply wanted to know what people on this site felt in an aggregated and well put together forum, not some long convoluted list of scores and broken opinions.

If you cant understand that then please just dont post idiotic things like you just did. Anymore posts like that and they will just be ignored.

Thanks again.

I believe I have the information which you seek. IIRC, one component of your score is the amount of time you use to take the test. The first time you took it you sort of breezed through fairly quickly and got an 85. Not satisfied, you took it again, giving it more attention. Your answers were probably better, but you took longer to arrive at them, resulting in the same net score. Finally, you tried random answers, taking hardly any time at all (beyond the minimum necessary to click the buttons), and got a 95, even though your random answers were almost certainly the worst set of the three.

Makes sense to me.

Thats really funny to me.. lol.. if that is the case, which I wouldn't be surprised if it was, then the test is useless for all intents purposes. Just like the fallacy of the real IQ test, and so it goes with this test.

If I was to personally say, now that I have given it some serious thought I would have to say, similar to what a previous poster said, that if you do well at the test you are most likely a decent player at least, but if you do poorly at it it does not mean that you are necessarily that bad, being an understatement.

As a simple analogy, say you where to take a general sports test, and do poorly at it, that does not mean that you are out of shape or cant do things of that nature it just means that, you didn't do that well on whatever they where testing you on.

A more simple way to put this is, what goes in doesn't always come out. At least not in the way you might expect it to.

If anyone else has anything they'd like to contribute, Im open to opinions.

Thanks.

I did this again after going through it once ages ago, got 124. Does anyone have the list that puts your result into a category? I think you had to pay to get it, couldn't find it in the old discussion thread.

I reckon it's pretty good for a multiple choice internet quiz. I wouldn't get hung up on the results though, just a bit of fun/a few interesting situations for you to think about. The worst part is probably how the time limit works, it seems to have a little too much of an effect on your score.





Found it if anyone is interested:

IQ Score Skill Level
60 - 74 Donkey (Expected to lose quickly in all games)
75 - 89 Donator (Expected to lose in all games)
90 - 109 Average Player
(Expected to lose slowly in raked games, break even in homegames)
110 - 119 Low Stakes Winner (Wins at 100 NL and lower)
120 - 129 Medium Stakes Cash Pro / Tournament Pro
(Wins at 200-600 NL and tournament poker)
130 - 144 High Stakes Pro (Wins at 1K NL+)
145 - 159 Poker Genius

the logic in this thread is absolutely horrible.

Avg scores for random answers is meaningless. Some people will luckbox the test. Even if random picks produced a 100 IQ every time, it would simply indicate that the avg test taker cannot tell which answers are even slightly correct, and do no better than blind monkeys throwing darts.

The time is less than 10% of your score.

If you're scoring around 85 you're certainly a losing player. Of over 75,000 test takers, I've not seen a winning player score less than 110 yet.

You've probably been very lucky so far.

I just took the test and scored a 116. I thought it was a very good test. I think you are just mad about the results and looking for an excuse.

Is that right, well, well, well, looks like we got some regular einsteins here. Im a losing player eh? Well I dont really give a **** what you think, as I have already told you Im a winning player. Am I great? I doubt it, but a winning player nonetheless. I dont care what you think about this stupid ****ing test, but as I have asked for opinions Im cool about it. But for you to insult me saying Im a ****ing losing player, without even knowing me, then you can kiss my ass.

Again thank you for your ever so insightful comments, and for anyone who has something useful to say Im all ears.

P.S. Maybe you should take a look at the previous posts to see what exactly I and a few other people think about the validity of the test. Also take a look at the poll, seems not everyone thinks this test is all that.

Peace,

Edit: Oh and if anyone wants to see proof that I am a wining player I have ample amounts of it.