2005-08-18

As a Professional Poker Player (TM) I have to be aware of some concepts that are probably foreign to a lot of you amateurs. I’ll give you an example and hopefully you’ll learn something. You can thank me later.

The concept of the day: Sample Size

Basically, this relates to the number of hands that it takes to get a good statistical bearing on how you are doing. I’ll give you a real life example and how I am going to utilize sample size and it’s findings to my advantage.

During my recent self imposed poker break (during which I squandered the recent Party bonus), I have given in to playing one $20+2 SNG per night (well, last night I played 2). Since Sunday I have played 4 games.

My sample size is now 4.

My ITM (that’s Professional Poker Player (TM) speak for “in the money”, ie. the top 3 places) percentage is 75%. My ROI (Professional Poker Player (TM) speak for “return on investment”) is 204%, unfortunately my average finish is 3.25 which is slightly out of the money (1, 3, 3, 6), but we’ll ignore that for now because it doesn’t help my argument.

Therefore, utilizing advanced concepts such as “Sample Size” and “extrapolation”, I am going to play, say, another 225 SNGs this month. Given the stats above, I should yield approximately $10,000 for the rest of the month.

You see, given a sample size, you can “extrapolate” results. Most people would say that 4 is not a “large enough sample size”, but I say, “Ha!”. As a Professional Poker Player (TM) I am able to see through the numbers, as if I’m seeing into their soul as it is, and am able to base my future earnings on them. Don’t try this at home kids, this is a very advanced concept.

This will be needed because if I extrapolate my ring game winnings losses I will lose approximately $250,000 this month.

In case you think I am at all serious, please don’t. This is a jopke to illustrate a point. Plus I have nothing else to write about unless you want to hear about my trials with JBoss. I also think I’ll only be able to get 100 more SNGs in instead of 225.

8 Responses to “2005-08-18”

  1. Sparky Says:

    Nice. I’m still waiting to extrapolate my way out of debt, too. :)

  2. Joe Says:

    I like this system. Sadly, it means I’ll be broke in….well, now.

  3. Heafy Says:

    You had me all the way up to the italics - what the hell is that about?

  4. Chris Halverson Says:

    Because:

    * Many people think that everything I (and others) post is totally serious when it should be obvious that it isn’t (trust me, I get emails about it and I’d like to short circuit that this time)

    * You read a lot about people making generalizations about their play when they don’t have enough info

    So, sorry for ruining it at the end. It was all just to save me time in the long run.

  5. Mike Woodhouse Says:

    Any sample is better than none. The progression as your sample size increases is probably something like this;
    Win 1/1: I may not suck as this
    Win 2/2: I actually probably don’t suck at this
    Win 3/3: This is fun - I should do this all the time
    Win 4/4: I rule at this, worship me
    Win 5/5: Everyone else suXXorz at this (or something suitably l33t)
    Win 6/6: King of the World, Ma!
    Win 7/7: Nobe Poker? Never heard of it. What? [fx] gunshot [/fx]

  6. Andrew Says:

    Did Hellmuth help you write that??

  7. Danny Page Says:

    Did Hellmuth help you write that??

    No.. Bill Fillmaff did.

  8. Drizztdj Says:

    I’d stop reading this blog if your ROI was anything lower then 200%

Leave a Reply