Jump to content

i'll no longer be posting here, good luck.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wow, who really gives a sheit about this guy.FCP never ceases to amaze me.It's like a community of five year olds.Some kid started a call-out thread over a paltry 25 dollar loan? FCP is like the bottom feeder world of the poker world.Be afraid, be very afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, who really gives a sheit about this guy.FCP never ceases to amaze me.It's like a community of five year olds.Some kid started a call-out thread over a paltry 25 dollar loan? FCP is like the bottom feeder world of the poker world.Be afraid, be very afraid.
This post is teh ghey.
Link to post
Share on other sites
What kind of winrates are we talking about?
first he claimed 4.5 BB/100 over 70K hands and over the course of 6 weeks came down to 2.5 BB/100, to which that is still silly as no one was beating 10/20 6 that hard over any decent sample. If you are beating it that hard, you would be playing a ton higher. i now wish I had saved the PMs, there was some hilarious gold in there.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that over 2BB/100 is possible with good game selection on a site like party. (or at least how it used to be)And i think that someone can run substantially higher than their true winrate for 70k hands. Just looking at my 5/10 results is hilarious. In my new database, im at about -0.3BB/100 over 40k hands. In my old database, im about 2.75BB/100 over the same number of hands.And then you look at the past 20k hands at 10/20 6max on AP, and it trumps it all sitting at about 3.7BB/100.Hint: my actual winrate (unfortunately) isnt going to level out to anywhere close to that. :club:

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that over 2BB/100 is possible with good game selection on a site like party. (or at least how it used to be)And i think that someone can run substantially higher than their true winrate for 70k hands.
I used to think this too until I saw the winrates of some of the best players in that game and over all of my Datamined hands. Very very few players were over 2 BB/100 and from seeing winrates of players that I know were great players, that put a lot more realism in it for me. Smash also claimed to be playing something like 8+ tables, and he is also claiming a very high winrate, something smells rotten there. One could probably have a winrate that high if they are playing just two tables, but if they are playing 4-6 tables, only a very small % of players can make over 2BB/100 at party 10/20 when he was playing there. The games were still very good when he claimed to play party 10/20 6, but they weren't as insanely soft as they were in early 05
Link to post
Share on other sites

I start new databases at around 100k hands, and i generally wont have more than 2k hands on any individual players despite the fact that AP is a MUCH smaller site htan what party was. It would take millions of hands.How much did you datamine?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I start new databases at around 100k hands, and i generally wont have more than 2k hands on any individual players despite the fact that AP is a MUCH smaller site htan what party was. It would take millions of hands.How much did you datamine?
200K and then compared it to several other people's DBs, all of whom had over 250K hands, with one person having two DBs just filled with mined hands(so around 700-800K hand). I mainly compared with people who played 10/20 6, and what smash said vs comparisons that I made with other people just didn't add up in smash's favor, which isn't a surprise since his claim about taking 40K off of Wintermute was proven false by wintermute himself. The highest winner with over 4K hands in my DB was at 23K hands and winning at 3.2 BB/100(and when I checked on them one time railing, they were from Slovenia). This was during the time that Smash claimed he was destroying 10/20 6. I wish I had saved some of the PMs, because anytime I asked a question as to either what his sn was on party, or when he played, or gave him the sns of all of the winners over 2.5 BB/100 with over 4K hands, he just started swearing and making flames at me that had no relevence to my questions or his claims. FOr me, I have a hard time believing someone when a rebuttal is put at them and they then go off on a swearing tangent and not address at all the rebuttal
Link to post
Share on other sites

he made a pretty good variance thread listing all the suckouts and various bad beats and string of bad luck.It was probably the toughest thing for me to take as absoutely true.still entertained though.You know he liked being talked about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

re DoinSublime's link to a 2+2 Sklansky Forum thread about 'who's the best fighter...' where smash supposedly embarrassed himself:In defense of smash, his opinion about the best fighter question though in the minority is not at all unreasonable.My answer there suggested that a Bayesian approach implied that a streetfighter would be the best fighter (of course, there are millions of those who already know MMA).His answer has credibility because of an answer Bruce Lee gave my uncle back in 1966 about who he'd want on his sidein a street fight.I said in the Sklansky forum that I'd tell a few anecdotes about Bruce if they'd admit that Bruce knew back then what hewas talking about... but they didn't comply.My point is, you may disagree with smash, but he had a point even in that thread, albeit he put down Bruce as being merely"an actor" whereas he actually fought all sorts of people in Asia back in the 60s...

Link to post
Share on other sites
re DoinSublime's link to a 2+2 Sklansky Forum thread about 'who's the best fighter...' where smash supposedly embarrassed himself:In defense of smash, his opinion about the best fighter question though in the minority is not at all unreasonable.My answer there suggested that a Bayesian approach implied that a streetfighter would be the best fighter (of course, there are millions of those who already know MMA).His answer has credibility because of an answer Bruce Lee gave my uncle back in 1966 about who he'd want on his sidein a street fight.I said in the Sklansky forum that I'd tell a few anecdotes about Bruce if they'd admit that Bruce knew back then what hewas talking about... but they didn't comply.My point is, you may disagree with smash, but he had a point even in that thread, albeit he put down Bruce as being merely"an actor" whereas he actually fought all sorts of people in Asia back in the 60s...
Do you see why?Good Luck.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...