Party High Stakes Winners and Losers (datamined)

[Munkster]

Re: Subservient
That's interesting because I have him on my buddy list w/ a note saying he calls river raise w/ j high. This is during one of my 30/60 sessions with him. In fact, he appeared to be a big fish during the sessions I had with him.

f

[Boris]

I wanna be bobkozniuk

[Steve Giufre]

Yes this is true, Id probably be playing 4-8 at Hawiian Gardens right now eating bad seafood if it wernt for your expert advice. A better guy would probably send you some royalties or something. Good thing for me I'm a rotten prick and have no intention of doing so. Thanks, though.

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the thing that brings reality in your face here is to see Kukavica make the top 7 for 50/100 but the bottom 2 for 100/200, played over 20k games in each.

Huh? Huh! you want to make money without variance? don't play limit hold'em [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I would certainly agree with you. Limit hold 'em has always had its share of variance but it was nearly as bad pre-boom. Now, there are very few true passive games. There is very little way to beat aggro games without running into substantial variance. I'm also noticing that fold equity is getting lower and lower in a general sense. When I originally started playing low limit poker years ago, I found the no fold 'em hold em games to be that of tremendous (a relative term to the low stakes played) ups and downs. As you moved up, however, you could find a great deal of value from rocks even though the games tightened up. Now, with the aggro games, you must make your money off the rare nuggets (fish) that show up with a major, major flaw. Other than that, you're long-term results are going to be some major swings. I'm winning, but the swings are large and the games are difficult.

[elmo]

Can you kill him for me please? He has destroyed me in the blinds.

Enon- is this Oct-Nov data?

[skp]

I used to play with a guy named Bipster in the Planet 20-40 game circa 2000. If PT was around then, his stats would have been 80/25/4.0 or somethig like that. If it's the same guy, I see that his VPIP is still about 31 but he appaers to have toned down his maniacal ways and is in fact showing a profit.

Subservient losing bucks surprises me. I held him in high regard in the 30 games when he played there. Of course, you have only tracked him for about 6K hands so his negative results don't mean squat.

Interesting stuff but in all honesty, this post belongs in the NVG forum.

[Klepton]

did anyone else think bucfan was fish?

i always regarded him as 'trying to be a tricky player, but plays too many hands preflop'

[krishanleong]

Over such a short sample, to some degree we are seeing the luckiest and unluckiest players. Can't really infer to much about skill. (Except to confirm perhaps your experience from playing with them)

Krishan

[NYplayer]

what percentage of the data over this time period do you feel you've captured? this seems quite imcompete from what i know.

[poker1O1]

[ QUOTE ]
Over such a short sample, to some degree we are seeing the luckiest and unluckiest players. Can't really infer to much about skill. (Except to confirm perhaps your experience from playing with them)

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree, I'm kinda surprised not to see too many people with 20K+ hands. I woulda thought that the amount of playing time and BB/100 would go hand in hand.