I PROPOSE A NEW FORUM: WINNING SNG PLAYERS

[Phil Van Sexton]

[ QUOTE ]
watch, i predict that there will be a few VERY LOUD and outspoken voices in this thread who rip my idea to shreds and call me all sorts of names, insult my character and all manner of other things.

i'd be willing to bet $100 that each of them is a losing player. this bet would have about a $75-$90 EV.

[/ QUOTE ]

So I could rip your idea to shreads AND win $100 if I'm a winning player on pokerprophecy? That's a very tempting offer.

[Hood]

Don't worry, must have been clerical error. Just checked your PP info and it says you're a professional. how odd.

[ QUOTE ]
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


PLEASE...INVITE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!


HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


WHAT DO I HAVE TO DO TO JOIN?????????????????



WD

[/ QUOTE ]

[GauchoFish]

the principle was that if you did this, and you were a winning player...you would be a rare expception to the rule.


WD

[GauchoFish]

it does say that i am a professional.

that is also my thread.




that is exactly my point. that thread is the most beautiful description of what i'm talking about it is laughable. i'm not sure if you put that link there to stengthen my point or to weaken it...

WD

[jcm4ccc]

I'll bet my ITM beats Daliman and Gigabet. So I would recommend that people start listening to me more than to them.

[Irieguy]

Ok, I'll bite. Let's everybody whip out their Johnsons and wave them around.

I don't play under Irieguy much because I don't have rakeback. Here are my rakeback accounts:



Player stfu_donny
Games played 121
Wins 51 (42.15%)
Losses 70 (57.85%)
Average Buy-In $30
Players with better winning percentage 44673
Players with worse winning percentage 201576
$30 Table: 51 wins / 70 losses / 42.15% wins


Player Iriechicken
Games played 57
Wins 23 (40.35%)
Losses 34 (59.65%)
Average Buy-In $95.09
Players with better winning percentage 54207
Players with worse winning percentage 192042
$30 Table: 1 wins / 3 losses / 25% wins
$100 Table: 22 wins / 31 losses / 41.51% wins


I feel so good about myself now. I get to join a club started by a petty, dishonorable, tiny little man. I can't wait to start contributing.

Irieguy

[revots33]

I read ALL the advice on the One-table tournament thread. I don't care where a person is in your imaginary "pecking order".

If it's good advice I try it out and see if it helps my game. If it's bad advice I ignore it.

Much of the advice has helped me and I don't need to see a person's Poker Prophecy whatever to tell me whether I can consider a person's input to be valid.

I don't care about my own or anyone else's popularity ranking on 2+2. I care about winning money at poker.

[Mr_J]

"The only thing off by any significant amount is the total tourneys played"

They have 60% of mine. I ran gauchofish through (you?), nice record at the $33s. Blindthief (you right?) didn't do so well at higher levels [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
You're not gauchoholic are something are you? Seen that one at the $33s and $55s, ran out of trial searches though.

"i invite you to pick five regulars (i like to call them 'lifers') and run their PP handles through Prophecy."

I'm outa trials for the moment. I checked a few previously and only one had an unimpressive record. This poster is easily one of the most knowledgable guys here, and it only caught half of his games anyway (basically only caught a 'bad run').

Why don't you point out 5 regulars you think are losers?

[citanul]

Here's the stats from my citanul account, the one I feel like sharing the name of, and also one that I haven't exactly played a ton of games on.

Player citanul
Games played 48
Wins 25 (52.08%)
Losses 23 (47.92%)
Average Buy-In $162.5
Players with better winning percentage 19471
Players with worse winning percentage 226778
$200 Table: 5 wins / 10 losses / 33.33% wins
$50 Table: 7 wins / 7 losses / 50% wins
$100 Table: 10 wins / 6 losses / 62.5% wins
$1000 Table: 2 wins / 0 losses / 100% wins
$500 Table: 1 wins / 0 losses / 100% wins

man i like small sample sizes. and man, did i stink it up at 200s in there. fortunately, i got a lot of 1sts in that set. also note: i've never bought in directly to a step 5. so to play a 1000, i'd have to have played a 500. so #100s played > #500s played is a bit uh, wrong.

to gaucho: i'll take your bet because really, i don't think that anyone is going to care enough to make "lots of responses" to your thread. then again, you'd probably just bump your thread every day for the rest of time and make several new accounts in order to satisfy your theory, so whatever, i don't care.

fwiw, i'm a winning player, i just don't think i've seen you add anything of value to this forum.

citanul

[citanul]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm outa trials for the moment. I checked a few previously and only one had an unimpressive record. This poster is easily one of the most knowledgable guys here, and it only caught half of his games anyway (basically only caught a 'bad run').

Why don't you point out 5 regulars you think are losers?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, the damn thing really doesn't catch close to all of the games. Sucks (or does it?) for the poster who had a bad run.

I'd be intrigued by Gaucho's choices of 5 "regulars" who are very vocal advice givers that are losing players.

citanul