Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /

count yourselves lucky!

Old
Default
count yourselves lucky! - Sat Dec 01, 2012, 09:36 AM
(#1)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
I would just like to say count yourselves lucky for PSO,

Off recent I have been looking at another forum, I have had 6 out of 8 posts closed for asking relatively basic questions.

Unbelievable stupidity from the posters, unreal.

This as made me see sense how confusing my posts are at times, but nether he less PSO as far more patience and respect for players than I shall now say the lesser forum.

to PSO and I thank you on behalf of the entire poker nation.
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:28 PM
(#2)
Guyguyson's Avatar
Since: Nov 2012
Posts: 114
The reason those threads were closed was because when people with far more experiance and knowlege in math and poker explained to you why you were wrong you continually refused to believe them and instead continued posting the same "theory" even though it had been proved wrong by just about everyone who ventured in to that thread.

The reason your posts don't make sense is because you seem unable to grasp basic mathematical principles.

I don't mean any of this as an insult but if you really want to get better you should spend more time reavaluting your theory or whatever based on the answers provided rather than assuming they don't know what you are talking about.

Last edited by Guyguyson; Mon Dec 24, 2012 at 06:31 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:58 PM
(#3)
effsea's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,609
you would think having 6 out of 8 posts closed would tell you something......lol

nevermind your always right and also never listen to anything but your own rambling............hiccup

you really should count yourself lucky to be allowed to ramble on here...........really don't know why they allow it...but carry on...we all know you will.

btw...thouht you were going to wait till after x-mas to post..lol

once again your battling a 1000% on your promises..lol

cheers
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 07:40 PM
(#4)
ketchup143's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 279
BronzeStar
i take a little bit of sympathy on u, holdemace, but the threads were probably closed because u often ask questions or bring up points that often have no way of maintaining a conversation. u seem to want to argue for the sake of arguing even if it won't bring any kind of benefit to the community. it's very difficult to respond to some of ur threads because of how confuing they are, and even when we attempt to, u continue to say no, no, that's not what i meant, and u go on into more confusing territory. we are open to helping you with your poker problems, explorations, theory, philosophy, what have u, but it bogs us down after awhile. just my two cents.
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 08:56 PM
(#5)
rolo834's Avatar
Since: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,424
holdemace i bet i know which forum as they are nasty and mean over there

ok if i think something is black but in reality it is white I like to be told/advised in nice way not just shouted at with no expalanation

Its sometiems good to have theories as you can think outside the box , whilst we ar elearning some things are very confusing

people have to learn somewhere and this is where i believe our trainers have the skills and patience

rolo
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 09:04 PM
(#6)
Cairn Destop's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,477
BronzeStar
And you wonder why I said you have a communication problem?


What I'm seeing in your writings is a lack of effort to communicate. You claim its the time of your postings, that you're tired. Simple solution, post when your mind is more alert. Same thing regarding the local dialect. Again, unless your word processor has an accent problem, there's no excuse.

And yes, most of my postings go through a word processor before I upload here. I feel clear communication encourages responses. So much SPAG has me picturing a teenager playing at an adult game without any consideration of others. One deep in angst, or with a huge chip on his shoulder. An image I'm sure you don't intend.



As to your track record, consider this. Your record is perfect. How many can make that claim?
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 09:24 PM
(#7)
Ovalman's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,778
24 days old this thread but has anyone noticed?

Cairn, one thing I've seen is you criticising grammar and spelling. Who cares how a person puts their point across as long as it gets across.

By all means put forward a solution or a reason he's wrong but I'm disappointed someone resorts to these methods to knock down a player.
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 09:31 PM
(#8)
Cairn Destop's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,477
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovalman View Post

By all means put forward a solution or a reason he's wrong but I'm disappointed someone resorts to these methods to knock down a player.


I do believe almost every member responding to this thread has offered constructive solutions and/or considerate responses to his earlier postings. Each time we are ignored or made to feel like fools. It proves frustrating. Consider the threads regarding some of his poker theories, his bankroll problems, and problem tilting.
 
Old
Default
Mon Dec 24, 2012, 10:03 PM
(#9)
Grade b's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovalman View Post
24 days old this thread but has anyone noticed?

Cairn, one thing I've seen is you criticising grammar and spelling. Who cares how a person puts their point across as long as it gets across.

By all means put forward a solution or a reason he's wrong but I'm disappointed someone resorts to these methods to knock down a player.

I noticed.

But just because its a month old does that mean its not horse bull? No.

As for spelling and grammar I'm with you. As a dyslexic student i know English is not the number one factor. But i also know that being able to communicate is important too.


Grade b


I am always ready to learn although I do not always like being taught. ~Winston Churchill

13 Time Bracelet Winner


 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:55 AM
(#10)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyguyson View Post
The reason those threads were closed was because when people with far more experience and knowledge in math and poker explained to you why you were wrong you continually refused to believe them and instead continued posting the same "theory" even though it had been proved wrong by just about everyone who ventured in to that thread.

Well, to be honest no one actually give me any proof my theories or questions were wrong. It was just their say so, from people who I do not know, so why should I beleive any answer without knowing a person or their academics?
Now if someone had posted a link that scientifically proved my theories incorrect, then yes maybe I would of understood.
But seems as I had scientific theories and quotes to prove that I was right , this did not seem to count.
And also a few members of this other forum knew exactly what I meant and gave me more towards my theories rather than against.





The reason your posts don't make sense is because you seem unable to grasp basic mathematical principles.

I don't mean any of this as an insult but if you really want to get better you should spend more time reavaluting your theory or whatever based on the answers provided rather than assuming they don't know what you are talking about.
I must of missed this post to reply to, lol.

and no im not taking it personal,

And thank you Rolo, yes things should be explained without rudeness,and made clear, that other forum was terrible.

And thanks Oval, yes my writing may be bad at times and misspelt but you still know what the words are meant to say.

Last edited by holdemace486; Wed Dec 26, 2012 at 10:57 AM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:01 AM
(#11)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by effsea View Post
you would think having 6 out of 8 posts closed would tell you something......lol

nevermind your always right and also never listen to anything but your own rambling............hiccup

you really should count yourself lucky to be allowed to ramble on here...........really don't know why they allow it...but carry on...we all know you will.

btw...thouht you were going to wait till after x-mas to post..lol

once again your battling a 1000% on your promises..lol

cheers
LOl eff, I know I cant help myself, all my spare time im thinking poker, and besides xmas gone now lol.
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 03:37 PM
(#12)
Guyguyson's Avatar
Since: Nov 2012
Posts: 114
If it's the thread i'm thinking of people proved you wrong using basic maths, common sense and rational thought and you should of easily understood why you were wrong, but instead you decided to either ignore those responses or acted as if they had missed the point when they clearly understood your "theory".

In the end it looked like you just wanted someone to confirm or back up your theory which is something no sane self respecting person with a basic understanding of maths and poker would do.

You're either consistently ignoring or wrongly disputing all of the good advice you get which just ends up frustrating everyone who actually tried to help you. If you carry on this way people will stop wasting their time giving you good advice and you'll just end up getting posters humouring your incorrect theorys and giving you bad advice.
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 05:25 PM
(#13)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Hello again, well maths actually proved my theory correct.

No offence to the other people who posted but maths alone is not just the science behind poker.

And how can a poker player say they know more than a master mathematician, whos quotes i quoted proving them wrong?

I can prove some of my theories quite simply, but the poker world will never or will not want to admit any of my theories...

And yes, i do carry on abit, but sometimes people can not see what im saying, so yes I will carry on until I get the right person with the right thinking to help me in my theories to prove or disprove them.

Theories are just that, to be proven or disproven, and not one of my theories, ever, as been proved flawed, with science, its only been proven wrong by peoples thinking which to me is not proof of anything.

I would of loved to Start that post on this forum, and even stars support suggested it for the other forum, they even told me I would be haggled to death on there lol.

I really can prove it you know, im not crazy or anything like that...

But there is one big factor to consider..

There is nothing and no way to do anything about it, and beleive me I have thought about that too,

Last edited by holdemace486; Wed Dec 26, 2012 at 05:27 PM..
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 06:40 PM
(#14)
Guyguyson's Avatar
Since: Nov 2012
Posts: 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by holdemace486 View Post
Hello again, well maths actually proved my theory correct.

No offence to the other people who posted but maths alone is not just the science behind poker.

And how can a poker player say they know more than a master mathematician, whos quotes i quoted proving them wrong?

I can prove some of my theories quite simply, but the poker world will never or will not want to admit any of my theories...

And yes, i do carry on abit, but sometimes people can not see what im saying, so yes I will carry on until I get the right person with the right thinking to help me in my theories to prove or disprove them.

Theories are just that, to be proven or disproven, and not one of my theories, ever, as been proved flawed, with science, its only been proven wrong by peoples thinking which to me is not proof of anything.

I would of loved to Start that post on this forum, and even stars support suggested it for the other forum, they even told me I would be haggled to death on there lol.

I really can prove it you know, im not crazy or anything like that...

But there is one big factor to consider..

There is nothing and no way to do anything about it, and beleive me I have thought about that too,
The reason none of your "theories" were disproved in your mind is because you don't understand how they were disproved. All you did was ignore/avoid logical retorts and then said you understood other concepts but they had no or little bearing on your original "theory".

To be honest you never even had a theory you had an hypothesis and you did everything in your power to keep it that way, you never took any steps to develop it in to an actual theory, not that you would of been able to anyway considering most of the principles your theory could be based on contradict your hypothesis.
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 07:27 PM
(#15)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
I'm curious as to which of Holdem's theories is being debated here,as there are so many to choose from.

Is it...


...not having burn cards in online poker affecting one's outs?

...or could it be folding AA if dealt it a third time after winning with it twice as the odds say that it's due to lose the third time?

...or perhaps it's playing a hand such as 62o,even OOP into a raised pot,if those cards haven't hit the board in a while,because they're due?

...or perchance it's that having the ONLY 2 cards in the deck that could beat someone hitting the turn and the river does NOT constitute a bad beat?

...that folding the flopped nut set isn't a terrible play?

...that calling into a raised multi-way pot,OOP,with 83o is a GOOD play?

Or maybe I'm on the wrong track completely and it's something more nuanced and "advanced",like...

...Pokerstars being rigged for (take your choice) action,general ghits and shiggles,to pay the big rake generating players or most succinctly just to screw Holdem out of HIS money and thereby put the stopper on a poker career destined to end with his domination of the WSOP ME?

...no,no,I bet it's the theory,put forth several times by our erstwhile searcher of all that is good and true on the virtual felt,that Dave,John,JDean and the other teachers and analyzers here are naught by shills for the site,intent on teaching bad concepts to make losing players of all you sheep.


MY theory is that you're probably leveling the forum again with all this claptrap,and I (unlike you in your submissions...) actually have empirical data on which to base my theory---you're having admitted to doing so once before.
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 08:08 PM
(#16)
Guyguyson's Avatar
Since: Nov 2012
Posts: 114
It's none of those if you can believe it, it was a theory he posted on a forum that adds up to 4. He claimed that pre shuffled decks being switched between tables affected variance, like say the deck was shuffled and you would of been dealt aces if you had been dealt from that deck but either you switch tables or that pre shuffled deck switched tables you basically lose your aces.

That was his theory I remember he said you get dealt aces 1/200 times and I think he thought if the deck switched and you missed "your" aces you basically have to wait another 200 hands to get aces again and that had an effect on variance.

So basically the usual sort of holdemace theory we all know and "love".
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 08:23 PM
(#17)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
I can believe it,more's the pity. It ties in with his submissions on folding AA when dealt it a 3rd time after winning the prior 2 samples and on the 62o (or any other raggy POS hand...) being a hand worth playing IF those cards haven't hit the board in a while as they're due.


**SIGH**

What he STILL refuses to understand,or is incapable of understanding,is that whilst,at least with the AA and 62o things,he is technically correct,that the odds stretched over a long enough line,do change in those cases,the effect on any individual hand,which is the only hand one should be concerned with at any given moment,is so infinitesimal as to be less than inconsequential.

The example you're citing guy,I won't even spend any thought on as it's only likely to leave me with a headache and nothing of any worthwhile gain.

Not seeing the forest for the trees is bad enough,but when one can't see the tree for being focused on one strip of bark,well...
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:14 PM
(#18)
holdemace486's Avatar
Since: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,760
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guyguyson View Post
It's none of those if you can believe it, it was a theory he posted on a forum that adds up to 4. He claimed that pre shuffled decks being switched between tables affected variance, like say the deck was shuffled and you would of been dealt aces if you had been dealt from that deck but either you switch tables or that pre shuffled deck switched tables you basically lose your aces.

That was his theory I remember he said you get dealt aces 1/200 times and I think he thought if the deck switched and you missed "your" aces you basically have to wait another 200 hands to get aces again and that had an effect on variance.

So basically the usual sort of holdemace theory we all know and "love".
It was not quite that, there was a lot more too it. However, this forum is based for beginners,so I would rather not, want to discuss this here,and try to confuse them.
Even though if I could explain exactly what I meant, and put it the right way, there would be something to my theories.

But like Moxie says, the only hand you should worry about is the hand you are playing.

So Im ending it on that note, as I do not wish for a ban, for posting a topic deemed unfit for pso.




,
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 10:54 PM
(#19)
Cairn Destop's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,477
BronzeStar
The idea of pocket aces hitting every 221 hands is a mathematical calculation, nothing more. If one divides the number of hands played by 221, you should equal the number of times any specific pocket pair hits.

Let me point you to my topic in the Beginner's forum entitled "Stats to Drown in." Based on a limited sample, three of the top five pair are hitting the statistical norm. One is a bit over and one is a bit under that norm. That sounds like the RNG is working just fine.

Speaking of the RNG, please remember that the old hedgehog thought much of the (censored) floating about was indeed factual. Problem was, nobody was willing to put up the numbers. I did, and wound up proving the site is honest.

As to the other theories, most can be explained with one very scientific term - "independent variable."

His others can be summarized in one sentence. "The site cheats." Read the data regarding the RNG. If even a portion of these charges had a basis in reality, he should be taking his case to some regulatory body or a good lawyer.

The main problem with our thread master is his stubborn refusal to listen to anyone contradicting him. Pity, I fear that shall never change.

I loved his explanation as to why he doesn't expound on his ideas in a "beginner's forum." Considering the difficulty he has articulating himself, we have been spared a fiendish torture.
 
Old
Default
Wed Dec 26, 2012, 11:03 PM
(#20)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cairn Destop View Post
The idea of pocket aces hitting every 221 hands is a mathematical calculation, nothing more. If one divides the number of hands played by 221, you should equal the number of times any specific pocket pair hits.

Let me point you to my topic in the Beginner's forum entitled "Stats to Drown in." Based on a limited sample, three of the top five pair are hitting the statistical norm. One is a bit over and one is a bit under that norm. That sounds like the RNG is working just fine.

Speaking of the RNG, please remember that the old hedgehog thought much of the (censored) floating about was indeed factual. Problem was, nobody was willing to put up the numbers. I did, and wound up proving the site is honest.

As to the other theories, most can be explained with one very scientific term - "independent variable."

His others can be summarized in one sentence. "The site cheats." Read the data regarding the RNG. If even a portion of these charges had a basis in reality, he should be taking his case to some regulatory body or a good lawyer.

The main problem with our thread master is his stubborn refusal to listen to anyone contradicting him. Pity, I fear that shall never change.

I loved his explanation as to why he doesn't expound on his ideas in a "beginner's forum." Considering the difficulty he has articulating himself, we have been spared a fiendish torture.

Well said Cairn.

Long story short...show me a player who thinks the RNG is rigged,for ANY reason,and I'll show you a losing player.

Last edited by Moxie Pip; Wed Dec 26, 2012 at 11:08 PM..
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com