I checked Hokiegeg, primordialaa, and bigtunajko 's graph on merge and all 3 of them are on the down side since they started HT.All 3 of them are extremely good players, specialy Hokie ... I know he studies the game really hard, but honestly something seems to be wrong with HT imo ... Does anyone know why ?Also croixdawg who started playing 6max is now on the downside as well ... I don't understand why they don't switch back to turbos ... is rakeback that high ?
Rakeback is fairly high, Merge offers players the highest rewards and two of the guys you mention have a pro status on Lock, so they probably have certain incentives to play, as most site pros do.The players you also name are long time pros, so they probably have a combination of experience and bankroll to sit in games they feel they have an edge in, even if the results aren't good 24/7.They probably don't play as many turbos because the volume of games isn't as high in those as it is in super turbos.
u might be right, but still prefer their graphs before the HT era.
make urself a favour and stop rating people skills by graphs
to emotionzor:I don't like this kind of attack.You judge skill or whatever u call it with ur subjective thoughts,and for my part I comment what I can see with results.So u might be this kind of "lick good player ass" people.Don't send me a single more agression if u don't wanna get one back with facts.
I don't have confidence in Merge's ST structure at the highest stakes. I've been hard-pressed to find examples of consistent success in these games and I know plenty of good players that had a nice upswing only to now be back to break-even or worse after a few thousand more games. Callisto and Ansatsusha (PHMERC) come to mind but there are contless other examples.I've experimented with the STs there but I don't thinkt hey're worth it at the higher stakes. I hope Merge takes Ryan's suggestion: http://www.husng.com/content/improving-structures-merge-super-turbos It seems that most players favor it anyway. If Merge gets enough requests, they'll change it. They've done it before.
Coaching page + Blog
I think you both (emotionz and lovely) have valid points.Both statistical evidence and feedback from experts is important in estimating a player's current skill level.Ideally we would want large sample sizes and EV results with rakeback factored in to see the entire picture. Combining that with feedback from opponents/those familiar with their game (or analysis of videos if they make videos) would be the best way to form the best guess of the player's ability, at least in my opinion.It may not be directly relevant in this thread, but keep in mind that a player can have no edge for a very long time and still be a good player (Think of why some of the best players historically have been broke many times, game selection and bankroll management are two big ones). Many guys play a few levels too high and make a little bit or no money. Players can also run bad for thousands of games, and there are other ways to run bad that won't be detected by the red line (preflop hand distribution, board texture variance).
results are a direct imput of skills + table selection + discipline. Some of the best players have the best skill, but might lack the other areas.im friends with a lot of the better regs and a lot of the worse regs aswell, i know this by heart i was just trying to give you an advice since i was like you before i realized how stupid is to think like that. Thanks for appreciating my advices, btw
that make sens, I kind of agree with your arguments.
What makes you think hypers aren't worth it at high stakes on Merge? You start off 5bb deeper, to me that would seem like a potential for greater ROI/less variance.
While Serkules is making on average 100k/month and sifosis made 100k in January at250$ average stake...well that says it all about HT's potential. You just need lots of volume and results will come if you're doing it right.