Your results speak for themselves and so does your attitude to criticism.

zerosum79 on Merge

SNG 694 -$0.32 $6.54 -3.6% -$225 54

Get over it dude. This was settled about 200 posts ago.

I'm going to start this post by saying that I have absolutely no horse in this race. I don't own this book, I don't intend to purchase this book in the future, and I have no connection to Zerosum outside of this thread and few pms exchanged when this book came out where he answered some inquiries I had.

Now I'm going to respond to Cwoc. No. Your point has no validity what so ever. Zerosum has stated many times that his book is written for 9max turbos and reg speeds. 6max superturbos are not even close to the same game and should not be treated as such. And yes, that sample size is completely lol. There are absolute crushers in these games that run hundreds and hundreds of buyins below ev over 30-40k game samples. Zerosum's sample of supers means nothing. Further, considering the book teaches a game entirely different from the games he is playing in that sample, it doesn't matter if he wins or loses over any sample. If he was losing at 9 max turbos over a reasonable sample on that screen name, I would be the first to agree with you. But you are so incredibly far off base that you lost all credibility in your trolling.

zerosum doesn't agree with you he suggested that we should include his 18 man games as his 9 man results were far from impressive.

"However, if you want to accurately judge my playing results, please at least include 18-man SNG's in your filtering to achieve a more accurate accounting of my true ROI. Mostly I specialized in 18man SNGs and achieved a much better win-rate than you posted."

zerosum seems to have very limited poker skills and little 9 man experience. It is entirely valid to research authors or coaches who claim they can teach us to "crush" and are asking for us to pay them. The hysterical tone of your reply leads me to suspect that you are at least friendly with zerosum.

To be fair, 18 mans are much closer to 9mans with regard to format than 9 mans are to 6max supers. But this isn't really relevant anyway.

The "hysterical" (overzealous usage of hysterical me thinks) tone of my reply stems from my playing high stakes super turbos for a living and the thought of judging even the best player in the worlds game off of that sample is legitimately "hysterical." The thought of judging the best player in the worlds game off of a sample 10x that size is nearly equally hysterical. I could care less if you troll zerosum. It appears as if you have been doing it for quite a while and I haven't said a word to you about it. However when you spew blatantly incorrect information while doing so (especially when it is about the games I play for a living) and derive a blatantly off base hypothesis based on that incorrect information, I feel it necessary to step in.

I welcome you to continue trolling zerosum as much as you like. I simply don't care. But do not mislead people (and apparently yourself) by using that 2xx game 6max superturbo sample as a benchmark for his authority in 9man regs/turbos.

Six-man and nine-man are both games where stt icm calculators are used extensively. I have not spewed anything incorrect I'll leave that to you. If someone does not play much and does not do very well when they do play this does not equip them to set themselves up as experts. I'm surprised you make a living playing hypers because you don't show much intelligence in your posts nor much civility.

It is ludicrous to me that you continue to directly attack people and then claim they are not being civil in response to your trolling. No one in this thread has been able to appeal to you on a logical level and yet you insult people who make valid points as "unintelligent."

I have proven my knowledge about the game by producing a book. By all accounts (except yours, which does not matter to me since you have not read it yet) it is a well written book, that covers the fundamentals of 9 man SNG play in a way that is not yet addressed in the current poker book market.

1. You have attacked my play history. I have addressed it in a way that people in this thread find reasonable (except for you).
2. You have attacked specific instances of strategy advice I have given. Again these attacks proved baseless.
3. You have attacked recent results in a format that I am working on over a meaningless sample size. A player from that format came on saying your argument was at best misleading, and you called him stupid based on the format he is playing.

How have you not realized yet that you need to take a second look at yourself and ask the question "Is it possible I am wrong here?" If you are incapable of critical self-analysis, maybe you should just stop posting in this thread. You have already been warned off by the mods and honestly, this level of obsessive behavior can't be healthy.

I said I was surprised he was a high stakes hyper pro and looking at his results this scepticism looks well founded.

SNG 47,917 -$0.08 $15.64 -1.3% -$3,959 63

Anyone can self-publish.

The coaches are always bigging each other up. The only objective measure of quality is playing results.

I've quoted it. How is that an attack ? How about a reaity check sometime ?

We have discussed a bit of strategy and I can see why you're not doing very well. It's not all bad luck !


He did go off on one based on something I didn't claim in the first place. I just advised you to play a decent volume of games to prove yourself. As it stands you have not done very well in any format or even all of them combined.

Hey Cwocwoc,
Why don't you show us your results so we can see how it's done? Also, it's interesting you have not posted anything about what games you play and what sites or even if you play poker since most of your post counts comes from Sports section.
At least OP has shown his results and had other winning players give him thumbs up.

How dare you challenge Cwocwoc's credibility? This is how things are done: first you make 200K playing poker (done), then you go into sport betting, which is more scalable than poker, to make a few millions. When it's all done, you go into investing to end up at the top of the wealth pyramid. In sum, Cwocwoc is half way through to making his first billion and is above all criticisms.

I got banned for putting offensive posts about ur book in this thread in the past. While I still think naming your book crushing online sit and gos, with ur lifetime sample is misleading, i can give u an honest unbiased review of your book if you want this. PM me

I'm not taking a side here, but to be fair the results of the person asking questions here is not relevant at all because he hasn't produced a product that is for sale, and therefore comes across as a bit petty. If you have issue with the questions he's asking or something that's another thing.

It is no longer about zerosum only. Cwocwoc has showed the results of LTT777 in an attempt to silence him (a low blow imo). We now want to see how Cwocwoc's results compare to his.

I didn't realize you were banned from the thread but I do know you from your posts and believe that you would be a good candidate for a review. PM me your email address and I will email you the latest version.

Regards,
zero

In response to my results being posted, I have a few things to say. One, I have no shame in saying that superturbo regs on merge are rakeback whores and I am no different. I made over $40,000 on that screen name in the ~5 months I played supers on it. Two, as you can see I haven't played on that name since May as it was my lock name and no longer usable after the switch. But if one analyzes the information more closely they can see I started at 2 dollar games on that name and worked my way up. I had learning curves like anyone else and lost quite a bit on the table early in that sample. Regardless, I never once had a month where I didnt make 4 figures playing on that account. And as you can see toward the end of that account's history I was doing a pretty solid job of working my way out of the hole I had dug myself earlier in my learning process.

Regardless, those results obviously have no relevance to this discussion even if they were up to to date and an accurate depiction of my current game. Cwoc is obviously going to cwoc. FWIW I agree with Pete and don't think his results are relevant to this discussion either.

Here is a more accurate assessment of LTT777's last 20K games from sharkscope including rakeback.

20K $0.54 $28.04 1.3% $10,866 68

See any differences? The thing is this is actually a very solid ROI for the games around the $30 level on Merge and his eROI is closer to 2%. This is the kind of subtlety that someone like cwocwoc doesn't really get. All he cares about is the stats that he thinks prove his point is correct.

Doubting LTT777 is a solid pro player on the Merge network is crazy.

zero

You completely undermine your own argument. Yes I will "Cwoc" if by that you mean that I will look at things logically. When you berated me for saying something I didn't say anyway you wrote

"my playing high stakes super turbos for a living and the thought of judging even the best player in the worlds game off of that sample is legitimately "hysterical." The thought of judging the best player in the worlds game off of a sample 10x that size is nearly equally hysterical."

And yet when it comes to your own results you want us to judge you on a good run of 2,000-odd games in the $50s and ignore the other 40,000 games.

"And as you can see toward the end of that account's history I was doing a pretty solid job of working my way out of the hole I had dug myself earlier in my learning process."

The point about zero is very valid. He has hardly played, he didn't do well in the games he did play and yet he wants us to accept that he is an expert. My own take from watching his vids on Drag The Bar is that he is someone with good presentational skills and an engineering/mathematical background who believes that applying a bit of maths and his own "intelligence" is a substitute for experience. Zero has so little experience that he thinks that his push bot charts are some great new idea which he calls "pivot points".

No. You are wrong. I dont want to be judged at all. My results are completely irrelevant to this thread. But if I did want to be judged, I would want you to judge me based on all of my results, over all 6 of my usernames I have played on this year, including all 110k+ games I have played this year playing 6max superturbo SnGs. I play up to 200s now with a positive ev ROI pre RB. So obviously a limited sample of my results from much earlier in the year is not suitable to judge my game off of. If my game was remotely relevant to this thread in the first place. Which it is not. The only reason I brought my history into this thread was to point out that I have a much better idea of how the variance can be than you do. And my knowledge of that variance would be adequate for the purpose I brought it up whether my evroi was 2% or -2%. (For the record a -2% roi can be a pretty decent winner post rake back with adequate volume)

Again you may make some valid points about zero in your closing paragraph. And I'm not agreeing or disagreeing as I haven't looked at his work. The point however remains that posting a 9max regular speed and turbo speed expert's results in 6max super turbo SnGs and judging his 9max regular speed and turbo speed knowledge and level of expertise off of that is a blatantly incorrect process. This cannot be argued, because it is fact.

I'm sure you will come back with something, whether it be about my game or about zeros videos or something else. None of which will be relevant to my argument because the point I am making cannot be argued logically. Only illogically.

Good luck to you cwoc. I've wasted enough time feeding you ITT. It is very unlikely that I will respond to any further posts here, but I know you will attempt to bring me back, so best of luck in that endeavor.

A somewhat arrogant claim. Hello earth to LT777 ALL the games have some significance to playing ability. Obv 200k is better than 50 but if you lose 50 out of 50 it is highly likely that you are hopeless.

It can be argued. Someone who is great at 6 max stt sngs has more aptitude than someone who loses at those as well. Which one would you rather stake for other games ?

Yes I have replied to your tosh.

Cwocwoc is totally interested in irrelevant results and so am I therefore I want to see Cwocwoc's graph. When are you showing us your graph Cwocwoc?

I figure another 100 or 200 posts and someone will say something about the book supposedly under discussion.

He'll never show his stats or even prove he plays poker. He is a troll to the max. Stats or get out.

Let me see if I can cut to the chase and cliffs notes each side to speed things up.

Cwoc: you have bad results

Zero: you haven't read the book and there are other factors to consider.

Cwoc: I disagree

Look accurate?

I have exchanged a couple PMs with Cwoc and he is done with this thread.

Hey jimdo, I expect when Mecastyles reviews the book this thread will get back on track. He said it might take him a week or so to get to it but I expect it will spark some good discussion.

zero