I PROPOSE A NEW FORUM: WINNING SNG PLAYERS

[valenzuela]

1) You blew a whole bankroll so you suck.
2) I have a higher ROI than Irie( well my stakes are 100 times lower).
3) I play on Ultimate Bet.

[Paul2432]

[ QUOTE ]
"when you see somebody with 300 tourneys on there, i think, you can have a pretty good idea of how accurate that is."

I don't think so. I think the variance is too great.

[/ QUOTE ]

ITM converges much faster than ROI. For instance after 300 tournaments the 95% CI for ROI is ~ +/- 20%, but for ITM the 95% CI is ~ +/- 5%.

Of course ITM is much less meaningful than ROI. You get what you pay for.

Paul

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont play on party or skins...guess I'm out...

[/ QUOTE ]

HAHAHAH UR NOT GONNA GET THE FREE HAT AND TSHIRT FOR SIGNING UP. LOLOLOL.

I think this is a real dumb idea. I'm curious if my PoPro stats say I suck at poker too.

[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd say they should be put in one of four categories.

A. Losing player
B. Break even/slight losing/slight winning player
C. Winning player
D. Dominates the game


Prophecy only breaks it down by ITM% so this would probably look like:

A: <28%ITM
B: 30%-35% ITM
C: 36%-39% ITM
D: 40%+ ITM



WD

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it occur to you that it's really easy to inflate your ITM percentage? You want my stats? Here goes. Over 224 tourneys at the 55s, my ITM is 35.3% and my ROI is 11.2%. If I wanted to prove you wrong though, I could probably boost my ITM up to 40% very easily. Do you know why I don't do this? ITM is an OK guideline, but it should not be the one stat that determines winning vs. losing players.

[GauchoFish]

besides a couple of supportive PM's it seems this idea is not well received from the community at large...there have also been some good points brought up that i agree with for why the current system works fine.

lets let this thread die. thanks for all the responses.

GauchoFish

[TheUsher]

[ QUOTE ]
i'd say they should be put in one of four categories.

A. Losing player
B. Break even/slight losing/slight winning player
C. Winning player
D. Dominates the game


Prophecy only breaks it down by ITM% so this would probably look like:

A: <28%ITM
B: 30%-35% ITM
C: 36%-39% ITM
D: 40%+ ITM



WD

[/ QUOTE ]

Haven't read this loooonng thread but the 40+ ITM is crap since it could be skewed with 3rd place finishes. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of aggressive players here have lower ITM's than 40% but a higher ROI than *most* of those players with ITM's 3-4% higher (10%+/-).

Edit: Wow finished the thread and realized that this might just be an attempt to garner a bunch of unknown 2+2 usernames on Party. Seems like a good idea to know who to watch out for [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[SharkBait]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes i realized this after I posted it.

I think that players who ar less than expert status should be able to participate but should be noted as such.

what the problem is in this forum is all of the people who people turn to for advice are less than winning players.

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.


WD

[/ QUOTE ]

Gaucho-

I'd love to insult your character, call you names and do all sorts of things...unfortunately my ITM% and ROI% are not sufficient for me to do so in a credible manner. I also don't have a gazillion posts here.

I am a loser. Please ignore my posts.

[shejk]

At first, I was puzzled, then I became angry. Now, I'm just grinning in solitude.

[Phoenix1010]

Player phoenix1010
Games played 170
Wins 70 (41.18%)
Losses 100 (58.82%)
Average Buy-In $19.06
Players with better winning percentage 46647
Players with worse winning percentage 199602
$20 Table: 62 wins / 92 losses / 40.26% wins
$10 Table: 8 wins / 8 losses / 50% wins

I'm in! Woot! I will only join if there's a secret handshake.

In all seriousness, I'm not sure how this forum was supposed to come to be, or supposed to be enforced, but it's not a good idea, for the reasons that everyone else has pointed out. However, I think you've brought up some interesting points (albeit not in the best way). I think it's clear that there is something of a "pecking order" in this forum and sometimes there is a somewhat clique-like feel among the more respected posters. I've noticed a few instances where a poster will present his opinion (often in a snide or condescending manner), provide no basis for it, and then leave the discussion without presenting any defense for his stance or response to reasonable counterpoints, aside from his reputation. I'm not saying this is the norm, but it does happen. As you've pointed out, post count is not nearly a good enough indicator that someone knows what he's talking about, or a good enough arbiter betweeen differing opinions. I would not be surprised if some vocal posters don't happen to be winning players. There is not a direct correlation between post count and skill. So why should we automatically trust a respected poster to be giving the best advice?

What you're suggesting, that we give credit to people's opinions based solely on their statistics, is equally useless. There are at least two posters who have used this method before ("oh you don't agree with me? What's your ROI?"), and it should be obvious how pointless it is. A winning player makes winning plays, but there are often multiple ways to handle a given situation. Winning players disagree all the time, often on fairly fundamental concepts. And I don't have to tell you that you can be a winning player while still being flat out wrong on some topics (I win, but I have my leaks, and I have some misconceptions, and I'm willing to admit that). That's why discussion is so important. What would be the point of a "Winning SnG Players" forum if the person with the best stats was always deferred to without anyone asking that he explain himself. Would an "Ask Gigabet" forum be nearly as helpful as the discussions that have taken place on this forum in the past few days? I personally don't think so.

There is one clearcut way to guage the strength of an argument: how well it's proponent can defend it. There are a lot of factors that go into every poker decision. There are a lot of criteria and a lot evidence that can be brought up to determine the value of a given play. Anyone who is willing to present a viewpoint on a given subject should be ready and willing to provide support for his argument, regardless of how much the other posters here like him, or how high his inflated, inaccurate, useless Pokerprophecy stats are. It's easy enough to see when someone's reasoning is completely bunk, and it's easy enough to see when someone really has a base to their thoughts. Anyone with something to say should submit their reasoning for judgement. Otherwise, how is he really helping anyone?

The discussions and arguments that take place here are where the real value lies. Any 6 year old can take a list of instructions from a top player and be a slight winner, but only someone who is really paying attention and trying to grasp the concepts being presented can reach his true potential. The real top players help the most when they provide insight into the various considerations for each hand, and the deeper concepts that dictate the best style for each situation. If you can catch the gems that come out of even one of those posts, you gain a lot more than reading 12 answers where someone from the in-crowd simply tells you he'd fold there.

Of course, this is all just my opinion. I do think that this forum runs very well, and I'm thankful mostly to the top posters for the various insights that they generously give. But, I think everyone would like to see a higher frequency of quality posts, and a lower frequency of baseless opinions, unearned cockiness, and useless bragging. I could be wrong though.

-Phoenix

[cleinen]

If you don't like the forum format on this site find another site. happy hunting