Since I tend to play promos differently, they skew my statistics. Sometimes, I like to check the last month or two, to see how many hands i’m playing, or taking to showdown, ect.
Yes Sassy it must cramp my style because i dont know how to play 7 games. I dont play those because 7 games doesnt mean anything as far as skill, its great for beginners to practice on to gain confidence tho for larger, longer boards but thats it. Im not competing for 7 games to win and feel good about finishing 1st or whatever. Why dont we have the same board in rings where whoever wins the most pots and chips out of 100 or 500 hands at any given stake level wins1st? Who finishes where after 60,90, or 120 games at 100 hands each game tells me 10 times more. Why do professional sports such as basketball play 82 games instead of 7, or any sport for that matter? Because 7 games just cant determine the cut into getting into the playoffs or winning the title, nor would it be fair or accurate. Top rated/ranked teams can go on a 3 or 4 game losing streak multiple times but after 82 games they are divisional/regional or eastern/western conference champs that go on to win the title. Imagine if that 3 or 4 game losing streak would only apply to 7 games in sports to make the playoffs to win the title? Those best teams would have no chance. You could easily have the worst/bottom ranked teams have a 4 or 5 game winning streaks out of 7 games like the Golden State Warriors are doing right now but have the 2nd worst record in the NBA out of 32 teams and have a shot at the title but their overall record wont even give them a chance of getting into the the playoffs to even win the title. Those 2nd 41 games of the season can still give some poorly ranked teams a chance depending on how they play and finish…but 7 games, cmon… I dont think my style is cramped and either are any teams. It comes down to the most wins/best placings for the longest time frame possible or most set amount of games played that becomes the most accurate. As far as any best/of boards, well…no comment. I hope this didnt cramp your style with this reply.
Well, if I really wanted to mess with you, I’d say that the minimum number of wins in a row on the monthly boards to achieve any statistical significance is 4
The longer the time frame and larger the sample size, the more significant the results. 1 win in any game/leaderboard/promotion is one thing. Multiple wins or high placings becomes more significant. If someone were to win several monthly boards in a row, I’d say that would qualify for baller status in that discipline.
dont mess with me when u say 4 wins in a row lol because do u know what it takes to win four 1st place games in a row? ive done it a few times and 5 or 6 in a row is my most. its not easy no matter how good anyone is… last year i had a 3 peat on medium 270 games in a row and top 2 finishes for those 5 months in a row and top 3 for those 6 months in a row. the last 4 high boards i played were 3,1,1,1 in that order. Broke the monthly point records too while doing that and didnt even have to finish all 60 or 90 games on a few either. So being this is the largest sample size from any monthly it is the reason i stopped playing those because i really dont think i can top that and wont put the time and energy into it…its a lot of hard work and time…just for the heck of it i went for the 4 peat but got 2nd place the month before and 2nd place the month after one of those 3 peats. just playing all game types now but was a great challenge but dont play there anymore as far as the boards. Baller status? hmmm lol. Im gonna have to start reading your posts more now lol …seriously tho,i do like reading your opinions and advice from you warlock, always informative for me and im sure for many others too, along with the newbies that hopefully take your advice to help increase their level of play. Keep it going!
Even Rank alone isn’t a good metric for overall Skill.
Anyone who can consistently, win @ rings, win reg LBs,
and win Promo LBs… they have my full attention, since
they are a well rounded player… not a 1 trick pony.
Guess I stirred the pudding a bit.
For the record, I’ll just say that I’m good at exploiting situations as they arise… in poker or otherwise. Sometimes I can exploit players too. I don’t think it necessarily makes me a good poker player or for that matter a bad one either.
I just play to win by any legal means at my disposal. If that means playing shove/fold on 300+ SnGs in a week, utilizing the “Carrion Technique” to outlast opponents and score well on a “first of” or “best of” situation, or simply relying upon value bets instead of bluffs to exploit calling stations at ring games… then so be it.
That said, my time here has substantially improved my understanding of the game and how well I play it.
So it seems that your description of of a well rounded player would be a 3 trick donkey. I dont care too much for the 1 trick pony either. Donks always win.