Quote:
Originally Posted by Papicoolo
but how many hands of those are plo?
If i had to guess 400k, 400 on ftp maybe
Quote:
Originally Posted by biceps
Ok Deldar. Proving variance doesn't exist on singles person (your own) long term hot run makes you extremely naive if not even a little bit ******ed. I think you need to read something and after that start praying man:
http://www.nsdpoker.com/category/poker-pro/
If after reading you're still convinced there is no such thing as variance (which I believe is not the case since you seem to be smart enough) please gather your data, make calculatios and mathematically prove you're right.
Sigh. I never really understood maths so I'm not gonna read this or bother to make a cohesive mathematical response, but what I will say is this. Sure, you can get a bit lucky or a bit unrucky in poker, I'm not saying you can't. But in the end the guy who plays his hand right will win more money than the guy who plays his hand wrong. Always. This is evident in the games through and through, and you will also notice that most of the HS guys don't spend most of their time bitching about how bad they run, unless they're semifish. U play good, u win, u play bad, u lose.
^My ideology is simple, if you play all your hands optimally, you will basically never lose. I believe strongly in this and I don't need mathematical reaffirmation to prove it to me, I just focus on playing the game, and the money is secondary. I don't really care what anyone else thinks. It always disturbed me to watch people play and play and play and never move up or have any success in poker and then start whining about how many buyins under they are or whatever the ****, when they could simply learn how to win. I guess this is what makes PLO and poker in general such a great, profitable game though.
The "variance" is not a real thing, it's just something to satisfy the inadequacies of those who don't have what it takes to succeed. This is why you get a bunch of guys who play a bajillion hands and are stuck at the same limit for the rest of their careers while they watch the game evolve around them, and eventually fall by the wayside and wonder wtf happened. None of those players will be playing in a couple of years, or they will be playing much smaller limits, and barely making significant enough money to even justify their playing poker.
As for Insyder, who always had a bit of a hardon for me (I would too if I were some useless breakeven German), I will play any regs 3 handed+ at whatever limit I am comfortable at money wise, if there are no other games and I'm feeling good (Usually at the very start of my session). This isn't that often, because there's a lot of games, and I don't play that many tables, and I'm not always feeling good. I also play tonnes of other mediocre regs who I think suck, but I try to only do this when I am fresh. Fwiw, I only think about 5 regs are significantly better than me. I also never sit out when the fish sits out, and try to help get games going. At low limits like I will play regs HU if theres no other action, but I have almost 0 experience, and there is rarely no action. Unlike you, I actually like to win money.
Oh, I was also asked to include my views on mr Ahmed. I think he plays quite well. true story
/Educatin da fish
Last edited by Deldar182; 04-24-2012 at 12:34 PM.
Reason: I agree w whatever aba said sounds like