spinoli,

im drunk now but i must say you are ****** terrible if you think thats a tough table.

if i could 9 table that lineup every single day for the rest of my life i would take that deal.

no not the case... I ussually play every 600 game running except the ones overrun with shortstackers. Obv if there are 5 other regs that own me on a regualar basis i'll leave but that hasn't happened to me yet.

hmm well then i have no clue.. variance? you take 600 nl more seriously?

If the lineup i listed was a joke to you guys, then ive been playing in some megasoft games is all lol

dude Tom n Toms and overbet56 are so bad

i would say variance is out considering its 360k hands at 2/4 and 480k hands at 3/6

my stats are identical for the most part

i mean they arent great and obviously they are the weakest players at the table. But they are still a lot better players then some random fish that buyins for 50bb and plays 60/5.

i would rather play them for 200bb

lol it is obviously variance

you are just underestimating sample size like everyone does

if u game select and play 4-6 tables 4.3ptbb is not that hard and for all you sample size NITs, how about we make a change when reporting winrates.

From now on, we will all create 95% confidence intervals with our winrates to account for variance based on sample size.

Also, no 1 million hand sample is valid because you improve as you play so the last 100k hands will naturally have a higher winrate on average than the previous 900k, etc

If you just open the first 6 tables of 2/4 you see, then obv 4.3ptbb is difficult, but if there is a 20PTBB donator at each table and some **** regs, it's not all that unbelievable

It should be easy to tell whether its variance because 65% of variance is all-in EV and another 20% of it is Sklansky Bucks vs. Showdown winnings. So go get a program like PokerEV and see if theres a huge descrepancy between 2/4 and 3/6. And no I dont think its completely variance. 400k hands is enough that variance could only account for like 1ptbb/100 at most.

Edit: It appears to be 300k hands and the difference is 2ptbb/100. Meh, variance could be it, but its not likely and youd probably know from various tools rather quickly whether variance was to blaim.

Also im confused. You say you really want to play people like overbet56 and TOM N TOMS but you dont have any higher winrate then they do on tableratings overall. I cant imagine you having a big edge over them.

http://www.castrovalva.com/~la/win.htm

over 250k hands its 95% sure that im at least a 5bb/100 winner then lol, or im a 2ptbb winner running hot. I mean unless you have it in your HEM or PT or whatever that you run sick amounts under ev over 300k+ hands, then it is extremly unlikely that your wr isnt at least a few bb/100 , if your edge was actually around 8bb/100.

LOL

Even without that argument I totally agree with Spino1i. Now and then there are way better 10/20 games than the avarage 2/4 tables.

Just funny to see how large everyones dick is itt that they prefer playing a table full of regs instead of tableselect. And talking like every 2/4 reg sucks etc.

table selecting takes so much work tho and would make it feel too much like a grind. If i sat there and just scanned tables constantly, found a good table, sat and played 50 or so hands until the fish left that would be no fun.

i personally enjoy playing this game which is how i would like to keep it

LOLOL

Ok so here is my best friends list on HEM as of today (over 1.3 mil hand database) As you can see, mr korea zen master is #2... and the first time i played with him was a month ago (I kept forte unhidden just for lulz.



Overbet I've only played with a handful of times, i'm down like a grand but I remember him well and he was really really bad and if i see him sitting I ussually get on the list.

I personally dont think table selecting is that much work, maybe like a minute or two of looking at the lineups of various tables, and usually when you get on a good table it stays good for quite a while.

Yeah table selecting is hard work and makes poker less fun. And not much pride in it. And if instead of earning your bb / 100h from the fish you earn them from regs as well it makes it easier to move up the stakes.

Which in a way ties to the original question... if your winrate at nl200 comes from both fish and regs then your winrate at nl400+ is going to be OK... if it is just fish then prepare to get better quickly.

Where do these figures come from? Or are they just your guesses?

They arent guesses. Look at the standard deviation of your graph, then the standard deviation with all-in luck taken out, then standard deviation with both all-in luck and sklansky bucks replacing showdown winnings. Looking at the difference in standard deviations tells you what % each contributes to variance.

you literally just made that up. it is nowhere near right afaik

*shrugs*

doesnt change the fact that very few players do it, which is all i said.

because smart people know how to optimize their hourly, but really smart people stick to a low number of tables and try to improve while making money, so they can move up in stakes and be ready for the next level. FWIW I play like 4-8 tables, but I think 4 tablers are really smart.

some are just not smart enough to improve while playing more than 4 tables

poor little 4 tablers

game selecting intensely and playing in the best 4 games you can find is not going to help you move up at all