|
|
#32
10-18-2005, 04:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: HU SNG ROI
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] doesn't seem immediately horrible. what's the payout structure? [/ QUOTE ] I think first is 15k, second is nothing, they both advance to the next round (of 4 person SNGs), and I think the winner takes more chips to the next round than the loser. Not sure what the prize payout is in the next rounds, though. [/ QUOTE ] You are talking about Poker Superstars II, right? 
|
|
#34
10-18-2005, 04:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: HU SNG ROI
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I guess Sklansky recognised that he won't outplay Chan in the long run [/ QUOTE ] I think there's about a 0% chance this was his reasoning. I'm sure if he figures himself to be a dog, he also thinks it's by a very slim margin. I'm also sure he feels that he is a favorite when the blinds become sufficiently high, which they probably are already. [/ QUOTE ] 0% chance huh? So you are saying that Sklansky thinks he's a better player than the 10-time WSOP bracelet winner and Hall of Famer? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] When the blinds are sufficiently high, yes. When the stacks are fairly deep, I expect Sklansky would make himself out to be at most a 47/53 underdog.
|
|
#35
10-18-2005, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: HU SNG ROI
By the way, Sklansky would never make himself a dog in anything. Never. He's way too sure of himself. How the hell does he determine that he's in the top 5 anyway? Is this from the same database that he used to predict that its a trillon to 1 shot that Jesus is the savior????
Indy
|
|
#40
10-18-2005, 07:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: HU SNG ROI
[ QUOTE ]
So you are saying that Sklansky thinks he's a better player than the 10-time WSOP bracelet winner and Hall of Famer? [/ QUOTE ] Yep, my guess is he does.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
