Quote:
Originally Posted by gavz101
This got me thinking. This is 72K hands since December running like ze poop. So does that mean that some of the really rubbish regs (that I'm not going to name) are actually only winning because they're running so well and are actually breakeven/ losing players? And does that mean poker can be so disgustingly cruel it can trick you in to thinking you are good even after 100,000 hands?
Quite possible. I really wish I were better versed in the mathematics of poker and statistics, but if you think about the typical PLO situations (read: a ****ton of 50/50; 55/45 and 60/40 hands), it's not hard to see how you could easily run way above or way below expectation for quite a while.
Also, I'd imagine that over (nearly?) any sample size less than an infinite number of hands, there's the distinct possibility of running differently than your expectation. Given the sheer number of people who play the game, I'd imagine that extreme outliers are an absolute.
Hopefully someone with an actual understanding of this stuff will chime in with some math.