Re: Been thinking about this project a lot for the past 24 hours
 

I agree completely that his advice giving is a real risky business for him.

And like you I think the rest of the project is very interesting. You should probably email them a fully fleshed out criticism if you can spare the time. support@pokernomics.com would probably be glad to hear from you.

Re: Been thinking about this project a lot for the past 24 hours
 

[ QUOTE ]
I agree completely that his advice giving is a real risky business for him.

And like you I think the rest of the project is very interesting. You should probably email them a fully fleshed out criticism if you can spare the time. support@pokernomics.com would probably be glad to hear from you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just emailed them.

Re: Been thinking about this project a lot for the past 24 hours
 

I definitely want to hear their response.

Re: Pokernomics
 

I sent him about 200K HHs, I don't really care about what he tells me, becasue a) most of these are older HHs (I've been playing mostly SNGs for the past 6 mos) b) I just wanted a free book.

Re: Pokernomics
 

[ QUOTE ]
I sent him about 200K HHs, I don't really care about what he tells me, becasue a) most of these are older HHs (I've been playing mostly SNGs for the past 6 mos) b) I just wanted a free book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same. A free book would be sweet.

Re: Pokernomics
 

He won't write a book. The book, FREAKONOMICS, was nothing more than he and Stephen Dubner taking several of Levitt's most important academic papers, and then making them appropriate for the masses. But Levitt's a serious economist, and his work is sophisticated. Pick up any of his articles published in peer reviewed journals, and/or his NBER working papers, if you're skeptical of his abilities. The guy's sharp. This study will be good.

Re: Pokernomics
 

[ QUOTE ]
b) I just wanted a free book.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Pokernomics
 

[ QUOTE ]
The guy's sharp. This study will be good.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because he's smart and insightful doesn't mean that his study will be good. And yes, I've been familiar with him for awhile.

Re: Pokernomics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Pick up any of his articles published in peer reviewed journals, and/or his NBER working papers, if you're skeptical of his abilities.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know much about peer reviewed journals or exactly how the academic world works, so correct me if my assumption is wrong.

It seems to me that when a study is peer-reviewed it is not as useful if it isn't reviewed by people in the know in that particular industry. The peer reviewers are coming from basically the same background as the originator of the paper and they may not understand the nitty gritty issues that may make the study inaccurate. So the peer reviewers would miss the same issues that the originator may miss also.

For example, in his NFL gambling paper, it is clear that he is not a bettor himself, so he doesn't know the nitty gritty of how the market moves. He states that the market barely moves based on his limited research, but if he was betting and hunting for the best lines (as most pro gamblers do), I think he would start to see that the market moves more than he thinks. I don't expect his peers - other economists that probably aren't heavy sports gamblers - to understand these issues either, so they can't correct him or point to that issue as a possible problem. So in the peer review, all they can comment on is how he converts data into conclusions, but his peers may not know if the data is accurate or useful.

I hope Ed Miller gets involved in this project. It would bring in someone who knows the nitty gritty and thus eliminate this possible problem.

Re: Pokernomics
 

We could hope that one of the peer-reviewers is a 2+2er.