The poker forum - my take

Requiem4adream wrote: »

I said it's a reason i played less or are you always this unobservant? The only thing implied is i would have played more otherwise, not better or worse but more.

Well I was making the assumption that you a winner, so the more mtts you play the more likely it is you end up in profit. So I wasnt actually being unobservant, just slightly more advanced in my thinking than you were.

Requiem4adream wrote: »

Look, i brought your mtt record into this for 1 reason and 1 reason alone. lloyd accused me of levelling you. I'm not psychic, i can only check things like recorded results. 5 cashes from 60 odd tournaments over 3 years. that's not "evidence" of consistent winning results in mtt. You may be a winner but, as i said, i'm not psychic and in the absence of any proof to the contrary i'll maintain my hunch that you're probably not very good at mtt.

Whats the hunch based on? Nothing. I could make hunches about your sex life which would have about the same credibility. Its obviously fine for you to hold any opinion you want.

Requiem4adream wrote: »

You're placing great emphasis on my losing year of 2007 where i played for 3 months. Cool. Over 3,000 tournaments i'm a proven consistent winner. You can isolate periods and sub-samples within that sample and show losing periods. Of course. I could also isolate winning periods (like january 2008), but both are irrelevant, all that matters is over the whole sample i'm a consistent winner. Over a 3 month period in 2007 i played bad, ran bad, tried harder games and finished up -19% ROI. i should be ashamed of myself obv but weirdly i'm not because i'm attempting to use the knowledge i gained on how to compete in the harder games to my benefit. If it ends up costing 7k to do so, fine.

I placed so much emphasis on it because its funny. You are funny to me. I'm sure your a long term big winner at low stakes mtts, and I wont embarass either of us by making any hunches about any other type of poker you might play.

Requiem4adream wrote: »

If someone said you should play 1000 $3 rebuys in a year they would be probably also as unobservant as you, they have 2x $3 rebuys daily on stars. I know maths isnt my strongest point (:rolleyes:) but 365x2 = 730, and that would assume you dont sleep or leave the house. Leaving the house requires having a life so you could probably get close to 730 played imo. (i play 30-40 mtt a day before you hit me with your usual smart-alec comeback pandering to your mates!)

Do you know what satire is? Because its pretty obvious I wasnt being exactly serious. I have no idea how many $3 mtts there are each day, and I dont care either. Its a matter of record here that you play long sessions, 10 - 12 hours long. I play short sessions, usually 2 or three hours at the most. I also live an independent life. So based on those two facts, who do you think is mathamatically more likely to "have a life"?

Requiem4adream wrote: »

So anyway this next paragraph is my final contribution to this thread and any thread (bar my EPT diary) for a while:

Scroll to 3:57 ---> 4:14[/B]

[/QUOTE]

I clicked on the link and as soon as I realised Adam Sandler was in it I had to turn it off.

Taxipete29 wrote: »

This was what I was getting at and tbh maybe it wasnt entirely relevant to this thread but it was what came to mind. I do apologise if I have offended anyone or if HJ thought I was getting at him, that was not my intent.

No not at all, I dont think you were getting at me at all. Under normal circumstances I would definitely agree with you, but he had made it personal a long time ago. Anyway I'm not offended and you may of had a point.