#1
|
|||
|
|||
# of Hands?
Using PokerTracker what would you say is a good amount of hands before you can get an accurate reading on your BB/100? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
use the search function. find the answer. been discussed innumerous times... including earlier today.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
*dons flame retardant gear in preparation for upcoming responses*
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
ok cool, sorry i was a little new to the site.
Thanks |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
Thanks Tosh!
[img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
Many of us are improving (or changing limits) faster than this statistic converges. You may never really "know" this number.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: # of Hands?
[ QUOTE ]
Using PokerTracker what would you say is a good amount of hands before you can get an accurate reading on your BB/100? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Would the answer change if you were using something other than PokerTracker to calculate BB/100? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] (I think it's safe to ignore Heisenberg's uncertainty principle here...) |
|
|