My TruePoker WSOP 120K Hand Challenge - update # 2 - Page 9

MicroBob · #81 05-10-2005, 07:22 PM

I think Schneids was 8-tabling the 10/20 6-max and winning substantially while not really using p-tracker very much (I remember telling him that he can export the stats from PT directly into the party notes).

I'm sure there are others....but you would be correct to assume that they are in the minority amongst winning 2+2'ers.
And certainly it's not crazy to think that they could help their own win-rate if they would stop being so 'old-school' and just use their PT and PV, etc etc.

TruePoker CEO · #82 05-10-2005, 08:33 PM

Thanks.

One correction : You stated that at our $1/2 tables, " less than 1/2 the hands will be raked." ... That is not accurate, sorry. There is a difference between "hands" and pots .... pots are raked, ODoyle plays "hands", which is slightly different. "Raked hands" in the sense of what a player plays are inputed, a player has been dealt into a raked pot, and is proportionally assigned "rake", regardless of whether he put any bets in at all or paid rake as a winner.

This might be a very generous offer, but we will make money in the long run by learning how to optimize everyone's benefits from play at our site.

Truepoker CEO

The Monk · #83 05-10-2005, 09:48 PM

Dave, all I meant was out of 12,000 hands dealt your rake at a 1/2 table will be approximately .45 x 12,000 x $1 = $5,400 not the $12,000 people are saying. That's pretty close, I kept track for over a year until the last update reset my stats-arg.

AA suited · #84 05-10-2005, 10:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You make it and if need be I'll get a seat behind you and pelt you with peas from a pea shooter to keep you awake. Can't see you needing it.

When you finish your 120,000 hands for the trip I can see ESPN doing a segment on the marathon man.

[/ QUOTE ]

imagine if he made it to the final table? the 120k hands story will beat Moneymaker's $60 internet buyin story by a huge margin.

or for even more fame, after you've done the 120k hands and got your wsop ticket, go all-in first hand blind. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

pokerrookie · #85 05-10-2005, 11:05 PM

Why would the site care? They make money either way. And it isnt as if he would be taking advantage of the other players, as if he were a bot.

pokerrookie · #86 05-10-2005, 11:06 PM

I guess that is a good attitude, but I find it hard to believe the site would care. As long as the hands are being played, they make money.

krazyace5 · #87 05-10-2005, 11:45 PM

Its cheating, the deal is for O' Doyle to play the hands not his brother Daryl and his other brother Daryl.

GrannyMae · #88 05-11-2005, 12:08 AM

[ QUOTE ]
but I find it hard to believe the site would care.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh please!!! DG probabaly has algorithms analyzing playing patterns to detect if any other player has a virtual seat in the OP's virtual (but beautiful on TP) chair.

the P-R-O-M-O must, by definition and design, consist of a marathon for ONE working stiff to try and pull off. NOT a team of him, the mechanic and his metrosexual roomate.

O Doyle Rules · #89 05-11-2005, 01:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Its cheating, the deal is for O' Doyle to play the hands not his brother Daryl and his other brother Daryl.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if you think I play bad poker, my brothers, Daryl & Daryl can't play a lick.

SinSixer · #90 05-11-2005, 04:29 AM

I don't think a "team" approach is the challenge that O'Doyle is looking for, nor do I think he wants to do this either.

However, for arguments sake, I do not think the site would care less who was playing the hands, on the condition that it was not an existing TruePoker player already. 120k hands generates 12k in rake, it doesnt matter who clicks the mouse.

It think its generally unfair and against T&C of most sites to share your account. Under this principle doing so would be wrong. The argument that it was a deal for only one person is bogus...