sick to death of crypto ie moan

[JoeStrummer]

Some good stuff posted and I accept the beats and just wanted to moan. Funny thing is Totalise knew that the tiddle winks site was .org and not your usual .com. hmmmmmmmmm.

Yep the 108s was an attempted blind steal, but on the flop i was 95% plus to win the hand.

Anyway thanks for the constructive comments.

[ifm]

 I just know that over the longer term, it HAS to be equally good & bad. Toss a coin a million times, & it will, within a few %, be equal heads & tails. Ditto a thousand times, or a hundred times. The variance DOES increase with a lower sample. Which is "form".

Nothing is more certain. Ghosts don't exist, & good/bad luck is dished out equally.

I was reading an article about this some time back where a mathmatician proved that there is a bias with coinflips, the more the sample the more the variance.
Not to dispute your point, just quashing another urban myth

[tikay]

 I just know that over the longer term, it HAS to be equally good & bad. Toss a coin a million times, & it will, within a few %, be equal heads & tails. Ditto a thousand times, or a hundred times. The variance DOES increase with a lower sample. Which is "form".

Nothing is more certain. Ghosts don't exist, & good/bad luck is dished out equally.

I was reading an article about this some time back where a mathmatician proved that there is a bias with coinflips, the more the sample the more the variance.
Not to dispute your point, just quashing another urban myth

Don't believe everrything you read, & especially don't believe mathemeticians who set out to disprove what's already proven beyond doubt.

We all enjoy, in the longer-term, the same amount of good & bad luck. But some folks give themselves more chances to get lucky, or unlucky. And THATS the skill bit. And others, the majority, sadly, only remember the bad luck.

[Gryffles]

Everyone can run bad. I've seen posts of long term winning players drop their bankroll over 50,000 hands.
Most of the top pros you know of today have been broke at least one, some many times.

So when your full house gets busted by some smurf hoping for an inside straight and he makes runner runner quads, dont throw your monitor in the pool - find out his name and where he lives and go and kick his head in.

Um so anyway, take up buddhism and chill.

[Ironside]

We all enjoy, in the longer-term, the same amount of good & bad luck. But some folks give themselves more chances to get lucky, or unlucky. And THATS the skill bit. And others, the majority, sadly, only remember the bad luck.

so we live on average for 3 score and 10 so after 50% of my 3 score and 10 i have had 100% bad luck so over the long run i should be instore for 35 years of good luck well i cant wait for it to start

[ifm]

 I just know that over the longer term, it HAS to be equally good & bad. Toss a coin a million times, & it will, within a few %, be equal heads & tails. Ditto a thousand times, or a hundred times. The variance DOES increase with a lower sample. Which is "form".

Nothing is more certain. Ghosts don't exist, & good/bad luck is dished out equally.

I was reading an article about this some time back where a mathmatician proved that there is a bias with coinflips, the more the sample the more the variance.
Not to dispute your point, just quashing another urban myth

Don't believe everrything you read, & especially don't believe mathemeticians who set out to disprove what's already proven beyond doubt.

We all enjoy, in the longer-term, the same amount of good & bad luck. But some folks give themselves more chances to get lucky, or unlucky. And THATS the skill bit. And others, the majority, sadly, only remember the bad luck.

He can actually toss a coin and get heads (or tails) evrytime.

[tikay]

Who can? Thewy? He prob can!

[ifm]

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/pr/2004/diaconis-69.html

[Royal Flush]

When i was younger i used to be able to toss a 50p coin to always get whichever result i wanted.

[moritzey]

Just another suggestion towards the 'changing the site will give you new confidence/make you play proper poker again'. I've found something similar a while ago, which was resetting/changing my record keeping tool. I've been using a website to keep track of my poker until mid-march, which included my absolute novice period (now I'm an advanced novice) and therefrom quite a significant negative figure.
I still have that number saved up somewhere, but have started a new statistic from zero this month, which I found boosted my confidence in my game quite significantly, because rather than having that big negative number from last year to look at all the time, it's now all black numbers and graphs in the positive. March was my first winning month in poker, but in the last 10 days I've already made more profit than in the whole of March, and blame that partly on having that new stats sheet. Makes you look more positive at things, I suppose?!

[tikay]

When i was younger i used to be able to toss a 50p coin to always get whichever result i wanted.

Yes, I'm sure you could - but that was SKILL, not LUCK......

As to ifm's link, I rest my case. After faffing about with computers, air-resistance, automatic coin flipping devices, dropping cats, bla bla bla, he surmises that a coin will come down heads 51% of the time, but pointedly fails to state the sample size.......

Luck evens out. Life must be dull if you think it does not.

[The Baron]

 I just know that over the longer term, it HAS to be equally good & bad. Toss a coin a million times, & it will, within a few %, be equal heads & tails. Ditto a thousand times, or a hundred times. The variance DOES increase with a lower sample. Which is "form".

Nothing is more certain. Ghosts don't exist, & good/bad luck is dished out equally.

I was reading an article about this some time back where a mathmatician proved that there is a bias with coinflips, the more the sample the more the variance.
Not to dispute your point, just quashing another urban myth

It is no myth to say that the larger the sample size, the smaller the variance. However, I would disagree with tikay when he says that the variance increase in a smaller sample is down to 'form'. I think it's mathematical, nothing more than that.

It's down to each individual result's effect on the small sample, being greater than it would be on a larger sample, due to it being more relevant on the smaller sample. In other words a single result is a larger proportion of a sample when considering smaller sample sizes.

So IMO it's not down to 'form', it's down to the fact that your sample size isn't big enough yet. This is where I imagine a lot of poker players who record their results go wrong. Sheriff Fatman said it best last month - "people just dont realise how long the 'short term' is."

Seperate note:

Ifm's point about being a good loser is excellent. Whilst it doesn't mean we should throw wobblers and hand out rub downs, if you ever get to the stage where you aren't hurt by losing then something is seriously wrong with your game.

[ifm]

I was referring only to the coinflipping thingy.
Tikay 51% IS a bias, i was refuting that over time a coin flip will balance out 50/50. (the urban myth)

[The Baron]

I was referring only to the coinflipping thingy.
Tikay 51% IS a bias, i was refuting that over time a coin flip will balance out 50/50.

What was the sample size?

[ifm]

Don't remember, i will have a look for the rest of the research later.