extempore

If you're interested this subject has been covered in vast, vast detail over the years, many times and in many places.

Now why would we want him to do that?I hear people say variants of that all the time. Life is a lot more interesting when people take positions that aren't obviously wrong. When a tournament starts your 10K (or whatever) in chips has some real money EV depending on lots of factors. If you're an average player and we ignore juice it's $10K. If you're some guys it's maybe $30K or $40K. If you're some other guys it's $100 if you're lucky.So what's 40K worth at the end of the first level? The same as 10K but with "confidence boost" sprinkled on top? If someone wanted to sell 100% of himself at

You must know a lot of developmentally disabled pros.

Man, I NEVER see posts that good on this subject. An extremely accurate and thoroughly rational cost/benefit analysis of these drugs? It's like I've wandered into bizarro universe.

That's funny stuff, you should go on the road.

Okay, but that doesn't make it suboptimal play either. The idea isn't to continually press small edges; it's to press small edges now so you have the luxury of decision-making room later, when your opponents who failed to press small edges will not. When did pursing small edges become reckless? Maybe we're caught in the trappings of language. Let's start calling the reverse "repeated squandering of +EV situations" and see if as many people will drink its kool-aid. Let's not attribute me positions I don't hold. You can dispute when and how sharply cEV diverges from tEV but I bet you already

This sagacious observation needs more attention.

I can't speak for anyone else but that's not what I said. All I ever did was bring attention to this statement:"Given that I made 3rd and 1st place in the two I've played, I came to realize something. There's no excuse for chunking off a big lead in a limit tournament."...and point out that B does not follow from A. Now if "chunking" actually meant "play badly" then your statement is a tad obvious. When is there ever an excuse to play badly, with a big lead, from way behind, ever? So I gave you credit for saying something deeper than "don't play badly" and understood it to mean "no excuse

"Given that I made 3rd and 1st place in the two I've played, I came to realize something. There's no excuse for chunking off a big lead in a limit tournament." Oh. My. God.Thank you for your tireless work to perpetuate the most loathsome ivy league stereotype; I'm sure your fellow yalies greatly appreciate it.

That is the only thing it could have meant. Please don't take your ignorance of that out on me. I have absolutely no idea how good he is or isn't except to be nearly certain (based on his own words) that he isn't as good as he thinks he is. But that's universal among people who run well early.

Might? What, did I send guys to his house to forcibly silence him? Sorry about the thugs. For some reason I thought I was just offering a couple observations, but you know how quickly things can get out of hand.

Regression to the mean is a term from statistics, not some kind of clever layered jab. You would have been equally on target to imagine I meant that he will get meaner and meaner, eventually beating up kids for their lunch money and stomping on puppies.

Someone please explain the meaning of this to me.The WSOP wasn't sponsored by Levitra for nothing.

It's practically the definition of variance. Of course they were, if by "fluke" you mean "way ahead of expectation." I've noted that many times.

With such a wealth of experience, how could he be off base?I wonder if guys who buy one ticket and win the lottery presume to tell the other players about their number-choosing errors.I look forward to his discovering regression to the mean.

If that sounds improbable to you then you definitely don't want to hear my whole catalog of stories. You will grasp the wonder of the internet more fully once you can get your head around the idea of "infinite free time."

It's a nice change of pace when an imposter contributes some fun value rather than focusing exclusively on vandalizing my reputation.

I know reading is hard but I was quite specific that I was ranking the players based on my opinion formed from ACTUALLY PLAYING WITH THEM. From the rail the only means you have for ranking players are published tournament payouts and the occasional televised hand. The entire reason my rankings might be a little bit interesting is that I have tons of information that you don't.Incidentally given the number of events I've played and the time in which I've played them my results stack up against anyone's. Granted, you have no way of knowing whether that's true or not because you have no idea h

This post objectively sucks, but that was a gem of a line, I must admit. Glad you liked it.

Right on cue with the stereotype, Rand. And less stereotypically, Camus.For any more you have to come to the blog.

Not when the other guy has it..1:05 AMPhillips makes it $50,000 to go, Kabbaj raises to $150,000, Phillips reraises all in, and Kabbaj calls. Phillips has Qs Qh, Kabbaj has 7s 7d. The board comes 9d 10c 8d Kc 6s. The six spikes on the river, giving Kabbaj a straight (a jack would have given Phillips the higher straight). Phillips is down to about $40,000. Kabbaj becomes chip leader with over $700,000. You don't think philosophy should be rooted in reason? You're asking the wrong question. That would be the right question if while he was betting he was holding a signed and notarized document p

Awesome! Are you available to write my biography?

Can *I* make fun of him, then?If you REALLY think people are making fun of antonio because they are jealous of his success then... um... you are lacking in analytical acumen.I like antonio too but let's not fling ourselves off the deep end of delusion.

Um, it's spelled "jopke".