[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why not just datamine it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't had a Party account. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

here: (Actual stats

Random guy
21,224 hands
VP$IP: 31.18
PFR: 19
BB/100: 2.90
Sessions: 126 (seems like he's playing short-handed alot)
Winnings: $120K+

This guy is the biggest winner on my datamine of 100/200.
There are people with winrates of 5-6 BB/100 over 6-8K hands though, so yes 1BB/100 is quite possible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I wouldn't think that game runs short very often being that there are only 2 tables with long lists to get on it.

His stats seem extra DERBish to me for full table play, making me just scratch my head. I assume he is just on a heater, as it's a pretty small sample size. Nevertheless, there are a lot of these DERB types surviving/winning so maybe I need to relearn poker. BTW, not trying to open that can of worms again, but just find it interesting.

Thanks for the post.

[/ QUOTE ]

So how many hands does it take where you can say that you are a winning player. I mean, I know that 20K hands is like a drop in the lake/ocean when it comes to varience in Limit hold-em, but it should give you some clue on how well you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you understand that you purposely picked someone out of the pool that was doing very well? The selection bias alone makes the data meaningless. If you don't know what selection bias is, you should read up.