Dammit Paul! Yer not making it easy for us to worship you.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Paul showing that he has no clue what variance and standard deviation is.

You sidestep the point:

his ROI for every $2 bet was $2.02.

If someone is buried in debt it is far more likely their ROI per $2 bet is something less than $2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, I just don;t get this post at ALL. Mebbe cuz i just woke up? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[trying2learn]

Dan also has made the always genius, "online poker is rigged" allegations - there's a link from Paul's blog to the post at neverwin...it's comic gold if you can sit through the complaining.

[Sykes]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Paul showing that he has no clue what variance and standard deviation is.

You sidestep the point:

his ROI for every $2 bet was $2.02.

If someone is buried in debt it is far more likely their ROI per $2 bet is something less than $2.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, I just don;t get this post at ALL. Mebbe cuz i just woke up? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

He's saying that a person with a winrate of 0.02%+ ROI can't have a huge downswing.

[blufish]

my .02... this is the most embarrassing subject title in history.

but hey, i'm a lurker, so what do i know...

[benkahuna]

[ QUOTE ]


Respect? Absolutely - he's very intelligent, often has interesting things to say, and appears to be one of the few people in the poker world who don't have a burning desire to fellate Stuey Ungar's corpse. But worship? I dunno about that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

On the worship tip (pun intended), I'm in agreement. Worshipping someone, particularly a living human, seems a bit much.

[Dan Druff]

[ QUOTE ]

I guess based on my experience playing with him for a few hours, I never would have known he was a "winning high stakes cash game player."

Not saying he's not, just saying he hid it well...


[/ QUOTE ]

Mr. Steinhorn, interesting to see you chiming in on this subject.

Oddly enough, your initial evaluation of my play almost exactly mirrors my feelings about yours. And I'm not just saying that in a "I know you are, but what am I?" sort of way. That's always what I honestly thought -- hyperaggressive to where you will either lose or win a whole lot at a time.

Now, I'm not putting you down. It's obvious to me that your style works pretty well for limit tournaments. I've seen enough of your results (both at your table and away from your table) to realize that. I assumed that this aggression was what led to your surprisingly quick exit from the 3k WSOP event -- seemingly an hour or so after going into the dinner break with the 2nd chip lead.

Honestly, though, I'm surprised you're selling me so short. Our limit tournament styles are actually somewhat similar, and certainly you can't discount either of our recent records as "just luck".

I'm also surprised you didn't remember me being a high limit cash player, because I recall discussing it with you at our 1500 WSOP tournament. I believe you told me that you're a mid-limit player at the Northern CA area poker rooms. Regardless, your description (albeit somewhat inaccurate) of my "super-aggression" would actually be one that fits the typical successful high limit cash pro.

I'm actually not a super-aggressive player. It may have seemed like it from some of the big swings I took in the event we played, but that was more of a result of the cards than anything else. (Either I was missing everything or hitting everything, with not much in between.)

When asked on the ESPN questionnaire to describe my style of play, I called it "a hybrid between loose-aggressive and tight-aggressive", which I actually feel is accurate. Tight players often chide me for being too loose, and loose players sometimes tell me I'm too tight.

I won't bother responding to your amateur psychoanalysis at the end of your first post. However, I do appreciate your pointing out to the 2+2 faithful that my behavior on TV was an act for the camera, as opposed to the way I typically conduct myself.

See you at the next limit tournament.

-Todd

[Dan Druff]

[ QUOTE ]
Dan also has made the always genius, "online poker is rigged" allegations - there's a link from Paul's blog to the post at neverwin...it's comic gold if you can sit through the complaining.

[/ QUOTE ]

Comic gold? You must be easy to amuse.

Go back and read my post on neverwinpoker. At no point do I assert that "online poker is rigged". I stated that I had been experiencing a disproportionate number of bad beats and ugly second-best situations over a very extended period of time on one particular site (Pokerstars). I further stated that these results nowhere near mirrored my results elsewhere, both live and online.

Most important, I never drew any conclusions as to the reason for these numerous beats on Pokerstars. I floated out various possible "what if" theories, but qualified each by stating that I didn't necessarily believe any of them to be true.

I play many hours of high limit online poker every day. If I really felt it was all rigged, I'd be spending more time out in the Vegas sun. You know... to avoid being called "pasty" at my next televised final table.

[trying2learn]

indeed I am easy to amuse. and I did read the post with all the qualified "what if" theories, which is why I posted about it.

honestly todd - it seems like you're a nice enough guy, but it's also fairly obvious that you went too far with your antics on tv and that you posted under a pseudonym defending yourself, which was also amusing. that's all I'm saying...but then again, like we've covered, I'm easily amused.

[Dan Druff]

[ QUOTE ]

honestly todd - it seems like you're a nice enough guy, but it's also fairly obvious that you went too far with your antics on tv and that you posted under a pseudonym defending yourself, which was also amusing. that's all I'm saying...but then again, like we've covered, I'm easily amused.

[/ QUOTE ]

You really need to stop believing every conspiracy theory thrown your way. I'm not going to spend time defending myself on this, because it's something impossible to disprove. However, I have always spoken my mind and never hid from any controversy in the past. It's just not my style to create phony accounts to speak on my behalf. Ask anyone who has interacted with me on the net in the past, and whether they like or hate me, everyone will tell you that I am up front and straightforward.

[Easy E]

Worship him? Scary...