|
|
#31
10-13-2005, 04:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
The 10/20 has a ton of variance. It's going to be tough for people to answer your questions if you don't know which questions to ask. You also didn't even read my responses to you when I said I didn't make 160k playing NL. Post questions like this in the small stakes NL forum or the beginner forum, as these sorts of inquiries aren't helpful for anybody. -James [/ QUOTE ] Okie dokie man. 
|
|
#32
10-13-2005, 04:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
1. calling james a poker novice if he has playing very high stakes limit games is just plain incorrect and misleading
2. i wonder if someone will make a thread if he goes on a 40K downswing or breaks even for a month. most people on this forum only see one side in the threads that are made.
|
|
#33
10-13-2005, 04:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
1. calling james a poker novice if he has playing very high stakes limit games is just plain incorrect and misleading 2. i wonder if someone will make a thread if he goes on a 40K downswing or breaks even for a month. most people on this forum only see one side in the threads that are made. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say poker novice, I said NL novice, which is exactly how he presented himself in the interview he did. See the title? You can have all the limit experience you want but if you haven't played very much NL you are a NL novice in my book. as for #2, it's been presented as mathematical fact by people "in the know" on these boards that NL has less variance than limit. Thus running at 15BB/100 in NL over "many many hands" should mean that it is incredibly unlikely to have that kind of 40K loss in a month or some such, because that would be a freak occurence on the order of many standard deviations. But yes, point well taken that most people do only see one side of the coin in poker, hence why they think a guy who wins $1 million on TV is a millionaire when oftentimes this isn't close to the truth.
|
|
#34
10-13-2005, 05:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 1. calling james a poker novice if he has playing very high stakes limit games is just plain incorrect and misleading 2. i wonder if someone will make a thread if he goes on a 40K downswing or breaks even for a month. most people on this forum only see one side in the threads that are made. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't say poker novice, I said NL novice, which is exactly how he presented himself in the interview he did. See the title? You can have all the limit experience you want but if you haven't played very much NL you are a NL novice in my book. as for #2, it's been presented as mathematical fact by people "in the know" on these boards that NL has less variance than limit. Thus running at 15BB/100 in NL over "many many hands" should mean that it is incredibly unlikely to have that kind of 40K loss in a month or some such, because that would be a freak occurence on the order of many standard deviations. But yes, point well taken that most people do only see one side of the coin in poker, hence why they think a guy who wins $1 million on TV is a millionaire when oftentimes this isn't close to the truth. [/ QUOTE ] 1. its still very misleading 2. youre missing the point.
|
|
#37
10-13-2005, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
just because james is a nl novice and you are also, doesnt mean you can expect to win the same amount as him. he plays 300/600, you play 10/20....
|
|
#38
10-13-2005, 06:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] And, as I also said, NL has the reputation of having LESS variance than limit so it is even LESS likely for 'outliers' (freakishly lucky months) to occur... So the 160K month should be more repeatable at NL than a 160K month at limit. If James282 could have a 160K month at 10/20 NL we can expect top NL players to have similar types of months with relative consistency... I want to know if this hypothesis is correct. [/ QUOTE ] I'm guessing James ran better than anyone last month. This month, it will be a totally different guy. Same for next month. It's likely he will never have another month even close to this. [/ QUOTE ] FWIW I totally agree with this statement. -James
|
|
#39
10-13-2005, 06:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
just because james is a nl novice and you are also, doesnt mean you can expect to win the same amount as him. he plays 300/600, you play 10/20.... [/ QUOTE ] Too true, too true. But looking at the success of others allows me to estimate what kind of success (magnitude and probability of success) I might have making the same transition. It's like a comp valuation in investment banking.
|
|
#40
10-13-2005, 06:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 160K in 1 month for a NL novice- easy?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] just because james is a nl novice and you are also, doesnt mean you can expect to win the same amount as him. he plays 300/600, you play 10/20.... [/ QUOTE ] Too true, too true. But looking at the success of others allows me to estimate what kind of success (magnitude and probability of success) I might have making the same transition. It's like a comp valuation in investment banking. [/ QUOTE ] i understand, but you are better off asking in ssnl, where people's positons are more likely to resemble yours.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
