State of the Forum - Page 15

SmileyEH · #**141** 07-06-2005, 08:46 PM

I'm finding myself disagreeing with many posters more and more. Whether that means I am a bad player, or I post bad, or other players just post good and play bad. I don't know. I'm beating the 2/4 game for more than anyone over 100k hands so I don't think I'm just running really good. It is sad, but perfectly possible that the overall forum aptitude for analysing these small stakes hands has gone downhill. Again, I'm just confused as to why I consitently have the wrong answer, but continue to beat the games more than anyone else playing them.

Please don't flame me.

-SmileyEH

PokerBob · #**142** 07-06-2005, 08:55 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm beating the 2/4 game for more than anyone over 100k hands

[/ QUOTE ]

How could you ever know this? Based on some of your respnoses, I gotta believe you are running good. Yes, one can run good over 100K hands.

SmileyGEY · #**143** 07-06-2005, 08:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Please don't flame me.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is nearly impossible.

-SmileyGEY

SmileyEH · #**144** 07-06-2005, 08:58 PM

That's my point. I'm out of line with the forum standard line so often. I know one can run good over 100k hands. Within almost 2SD's I'm still higher than anyone I know of (obviously I don't have a huge sample size).

-SmileyEH

BottlesOf · #**145** 07-06-2005, 08:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it has been for about eight months

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

I think more plugs in widely read national magazines should help things.

thirddan · #**146** 07-06-2005, 09:02 PM

sadly this must be pointed out...none of us that post here are all that good at poker...sorry to break to everyone...

in many poker situations there is only one decision with the highest EV...we can get into long discussions (and many of them are good discussions) but usually no definitive answer is reached, most of the time nobody that actually is good/very good at poker steps up and says "X is correct"...thats why its nice when Clark or Nate gives a defnitive response, even if its cryptic or one word that will solve the problem of what the actual correct decisions is, then its for us to discuss and understand why that decision is correct...

BottlesOf · #**147** 07-06-2005, 09:03 PM

nh

BottlesOf · #**148** 07-06-2005, 09:08 PM

This is a very good and not often mentioned point.

Evan · #**149** 07-06-2005, 10:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm finding myself disagreeing with many posters more and more. Whether that means I am a bad player, or I post bad, or other players just post good and play bad. I don't know. I'm beating the 2/4 game for more than anyone over 100k hands so I don't think I'm just running really good. It is sad, but perfectly possible that the overall forum aptitude for analysing these small stakes hands has gone downhill. Again, I'm just confused as to why I consitently have the wrong answer, but continue to beat the games more than anyone else playing them.

Please don't flame me.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]
This post brings to mind a lot of questions for me. Mainly, why someone who beats a particular game for more money than anyone else over a 100k hand sample would still be playing that game after 100k hands.

SmileyEH · #**150** 07-06-2005, 10:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm finding myself disagreeing with many posters more and more. Whether that means I am a bad player, or I post bad, or other players just post good and play bad. I don't know. I'm beating the 2/4 game for more than anyone over 100k hands so I don't think I'm just running really good. It is sad, but perfectly possible that the overall forum aptitude for analysing these small stakes hands has gone downhill. Again, I'm just confused as to why I consitently have the wrong answer, but continue to beat the games more than anyone else playing them.

Please don't flame me.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]
This post brings to mind a lot of questions for me. Mainly, why someone who beats a particular game for more money than anyone else over a 100k hand sample would still be playing that game after 100k hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should move up. I've played up to 15/30 but ran bad when I did. I think I'm a winning player at 15 full but probably not by much. The problem is I'm deriving all my income from poker, and I would have to beat 15/30 for about 1.5BB/100 4tabling to match my currently hourly rate. I also suck at handling large monetary amount downswings so psychologically playing a game where I win 4 out of 5 days is better for me as well. I really do need to stop playing 2/4 though as my game is pretty stagnant and while well suited to 2/4, probably not well enough developed to beat higher limits for very much.

However, whether or not I'm actually the highest earning 2/4 player in small stakes is kind of beside the point. The fact that I do win a lot and disagree with the forum line quite often leads me to believe that there are some systematic problems with the way posters are looking at hands. Or I'm just a huge luckbox.

-SmileyEH