my guess would be JESSICA,shes played for 7 years a ranks over 900,000. Although my guess is also she is probably a bingo player an those are the worst kind to play.Thats my choice between the 4
This is a hard one, but my choice is Ben (A). Ben and Emily are probably good players, but that means their actions will be more predictable and I’ll have a better idea when I am ahead or beat. Emily might be too good for me to beat though, so I’ll chose Ben. Dan and Jessica are the 2 most obvious picks, but are most likely bingo players. I’m assuming Dan’s rank is high because he bought chips, and Jessica can’t seem to hold onto her chips. I figure I have a better chance against someone who actually plays poker, rather than someone who is unpredictable and likely going in on most hands.
None of them… Like really, I mean it. I am a terribly bad at this poker nonsense. I don’t even know the rules and all anyone gotta do is come take my stash(is that what its called).
But if I did know the rules I might think…
One thing for sure,I would hope to avoid Dan. He is either very good and capable of smashing me or every hand would be a life or death bingofest roller-coaster.
Of the other 3.
Ben is a nit. He still has all&only his free chips so is risk adverse and only plays nuts. 3blind raises will slowly chew him up
Jessica is a friend. She plays for chat’n’giggles and if I accidentally took her chips I would feel Sooooo bad and try to lose them back right away.
Emily is a leaderboard hog. She plays 12-15 hours a day in every possible league and stalls/time wastes to allow others to crash out so she can advance. Heads-up, Boring, but easy.
In conclusion, Ben or Emile
easily B jessica
such a bad rank and playing over 7 years means that in all this time she never improved. usually playing for a long time means getting better at the game, but since she still can’t win even after all this time means she barely or probably even did’nt improve at all
Tore between the Choices and will pick B - Jessica. Just to find out She’s a semi-Pro who shovels chips to Her Family.
At the risk of being annoying and sounding a bit pretentious: To go about this the right way, I would put time and effort into my decision. I would investigate their profiles. You normally have access to some of the hands they’ve played. I would review the hands that they’ve played and attempt to form a somewhat educated decision based off what I observed in their playing. I would watch their play from the rail. I would keep notes on them based on what I’ve observed. I would ask trusted, reliable sources (friends and other players) if they have an opinion on these players’ games through experience and/or observation.
If this is not an option and I have to make my decision based solely on the information provided in the question, I would try to analyze and evaluate what each description means to me and try not to make any quick assumptions. I did this in a separate Word Document, and came to the conclusion that choosing A. Ben as my opponent would, in my personal opinion, likely give me the best chance at success.
E, all off the above. Replay is all fish, as a wise player once said.
A - Ben
all of them
I think B Jessica
As much as I love these deep-thought experiments / contests (no charge for the sarcasm), it would be nice to have a little context. Who could I beat heads-up at what? A turbo HU SnG? 1 hand of poker? 100 hands? 1000? IMO, asking questions like this one without any reference point is a bit like asking “which is the best tool, a hammer or a chainsaw?” Without knowing what the job is, any answer is based on so little information that it becomes nothing more than a guess.
You’re absolutely right. there should be details about everything: what the players are wearing, what time of the day it is, what side of the bed they woke up on… (no charge for the sarcasm either).
Let’s say you go to the lobby and start a new heads up SnG. regardless of the buy-in, do you know beforehand how many hands of poker it would take? And how on earth would the speed of the SnG affect your decision? Are you able to beat an opponent in a turbo HU SnG but lose to the same one if it was the regular speed? It’s a little bit like saying you know how to use a hammer (or a chainsaw) but only if you can do the job in slow motion
You know what the jobs is… it’s to beat one of the opponents HU.
You have little information, but it’s somewhat what we all have when we look at someone’s profile, without going deep into their wins and losses.
You have your imagination…
You have your wit and humor
So it’s a little bit more than just a guess (although you are totally free to just make a guess, like many others do, it’s not a problem).
It’s a game, a fun contest, and something fictional to discuss and maybe end up winning chips. Don’t take it too seriously. Just have fun, and feel free to add any “context” you like to explain your choice. We all do it
I have never taken it even slightly seriously.
It’s not even a contest, it’s just a raffle. I’ve never won one of these, but this is the first time I answered something that was actually one of the listed choices. I usually go with something like “shoes.” I’m virtually assured a win now that I have agreed to play by the rules.
Of course, now that I said that, they would never let me win.
I hope you do win this time
I nearly gave myself a concussion with the face-palm reaction to your comments. “One at regular speed”? Seriously? That’s what is meant by a turbo format? Without getting too into the weeds, the fewer hands, the greater the variance. The worst player in the entire world can beat Doug Polk heads-up if they play 1 hand. The more hands played, the more likely it is for the player with the skill advantage to win. This is why I asked the question - a turbo HU SnG may take an average of 20-25 hands. A regular HU SnG may take ~35 hands. A 1-hour HU ring session can have 120 hands or more.
Anyway, not important. I don’t take anything seriously here, especially anything in the Forum.
For the purpose of this contest, I’ll say I would almost certainly win vs “A” (Ben) or “B” (Jessica) in any game lasting 100 hands or more.
Thanks to all for participating in our latest contest, with special appreciation to @Maya for submitting something that plenty that was up for interpretation! I enjoyed reading everyone’s take on this. I’m going to share the results, keeping in mind that a couple of people answered with multiple names, while others think they could just as easily knock out all of 'em.
Ben - 8
Jessica - 7
Dan - 3
Emily - 2
Barely edging out Jessica, most of you think you could beat out Ben based on the information available to you. This was Maya’s interpretation …
“Jessica is the best poker player among them, almost impossible to beat, and had been in the top 10 for years, but has recently lost all her chips in 1 gamble gone wrong (went all in with quads against a royal flush) and his rank dropped.
Dan however is terrible poker player, but recently got engaged to a very rich woman who decided to buy his way into the top 50 on Valentine’s Day because she knows how much he loves poker.”
Some of you had a feeling this was the case with Dan! What do you think about Ben coming out on top, Maya? Got your own insight on him?
And now, using random.org, I’ve drawn the following names to receive 100,000 chips:
Congratulations! You’ll see the chips in your banks now. We have another contest just around the corner, so stay tuned.
For those who may perhaps have interest: This is the text from the Word Document I opened in an effort to make my decision. May be a little silly or may be not too bad. Warning - a bit long:
Dan - A rank in the top 50 means you must have over half a billion chips. Even if he bought most of that bankroll, it would mean he’s had to invest a relatively significant amount of money to obtain that bankroll. It is likely someone investing that amount of money into a play chip social poker site is probably pretty serious about his game. Someone investing that relatively significant amount of money likely doesn’t have the intention of quickly losing it. He’s serious enough about his game that he’s aware of his ability and is not likely going to get in over his head. He may come from a cash game background and do well at low stakes, but may not be willing to risk real cash in higher stakes. If he were really wealthy with disposable income, then he would likely try real cash poker; there would not be much sense in him wasting time on social poker. He either loves poker, particularly social poker, or is just that serious about rounding out his game - or attempting to. It’s all relative. The elite stakes here are a lot lower calibre poker than the relative stakes in real cash poker. Dan might also be one of those rare players who can earn such a high rank in a very short amount of time. If that is the case, Dan is no doubt a serious online poker player. He is probably interested in ring games and short handed or heads up games. It’s hard to say, but I would not take Dan lightly. He could be good enough to incorporate solid GTO, balance and exploitative play into his game.
Emily - Rank and experience indicates that she is an experienced, solid player. Her profile likely indicates solid bankroll management. The arrows do lead to competency and success at Replay Poker. Rank in relation to time indicates reasonable consistency and appropriate improvement. I would expect a competent, conservative player who understands the basics of the game very well. There are always exceptions, but it’s likely this would be the case. My take: Emily is MUCH better than me, but is still not an exceptional online poker player, just one who is solid and continuously improving. I may often not have a good idea of what Emily is doing because her game could be much more advanced than mine.
Ben - To me, 5 years and that rank indicates a player who is certainly capable of being a solid, competent player. I have observed players with similar descriptions play a game which seems beyond their description and others a game that seems worse than their description indicates. To me, this person understands the basics fairly well, and with me being a novice beginner, is likely a fair bit better than me - but possibly not. Their description indicates that they’ve plateaued and aren’t actively doing anything differently to improve their game, just enjoying the social aspects and the success they’re having at their relative stakes. Ben is possibly beatable through basic solid, exploitative play. I feel I would have a chance against Ben if I stuck to a consistent and (as much as possible for me) somewhat balanced approach, playing to the best of my potential. In a lot of cases, I quite possibly have somewhat of an idea of what Ben is doing most of the time.
Jessica - A few options. Someone who has been inactive on the site for quite some time or plays very infrequently. Someone who just plain sucks - not progressing. A potentially great player with horrible bankroll management. A very risky player who may have made a run in elite stakes and taken some bad beats and not yet recovered. Jessica may be very bad or potentially quite good - just risky and undisciplined or unlucky. Because Jessica carries unpredictability, I would avoid her in favor of Ben.
Absolutely! Ben is a safe choice. He’s a good player who has been playing for quite some time, nothing extreme about him, so definitely not a bingo player or a poker master of some sort, just an average good player with whom the game would be fun and a good challenge with a good chance of beating him. He is the least unpredictable. I think most participants saw that anyway
Congratulations to all the winners!!!
Thank you Maya and fizzymint. I will get busy giving the chips back asap!