I'm offering +400 odds if Stefan finishes 2013 with MORE CASHES than myself. There's a cap, so I can afford pay out. Only the first 1,650 pts wagered will have action: http://www.sbrforum.com/poker/
-
-
Bobby, how many guys did you stiff during 18th Hole Sportsbook?
This guy is a scumbag.Comment -
I would definitely take some of that at +400 but once I hear of a poster stiffing, I can't trust them.Comment -
Yeah, you should definitely believe everything you read on a forum. Especially from such a trustworthy source as Deem, one of the biggest known losers & stiffs on all forums.
Good thing you're laying off bet, saved yourself some pts.
Comment -
Bobby is a stiff.Comment -
Hrm...8 more dailies and he needs to cash all of them, with you cashing none? Don't you think maybe +4000 would be somewhat fairer odds?
Aside from that, why would you care how many cashes you have compared to how many points you won? You've got way more cashes and way fewer points won compared to the rest of the list...not something to be all that proud of unless you're eberetta
Comment -
that's why long ron Jeremy is my hero; he flushes stuff out and calls bullshit on it to save us all from making mistakes --- that, and he taught me the double anal atm extravaganza move I put down on centy's women.....Hrm...8 more dailies and he needs to cash all of them, with you cashing none? Don't you think maybe +4000 would be somewhat fairer odds?
Aside from that, why would you care how many cashes you have compared to how many points you won? You've got way more cashes and way fewer points won compared to the rest of the list...not something to be all that proud of unless you're eberettaComment -
Hmm, your math is a little off. I posted this yesterday when there were 10 dailies left & a lead of 6 before my 11pm tourney. The offer was for yesterday & odds were quite fair, as Andywend stated above. Obviously the odds would need to be adjusted daily, which I'm not interested in doing.Hrm...8 more dailies and he needs to cash all of them, with you cashing none? Don't you think maybe +4000 would be somewhat fairer odds?
Aside from that, why would you care how many cashes you have compared to how many points you won? You've got way more cashes and way fewer points won compared to the rest of the list...not something to be all that proud of unless you're eberetta
As far as caring about how many cashes, you're reading too much into it. Was simply a prop bet. Although smart players like Eberetta & myself obviously put more emphasis on cashing. Not that you're in any position to criticize, as I don't see your name anywhere on the leader board.
Comment -
Oops, yeah should be 9 dailies left, and fair enough that it was a smaller gap when posted originally...but if you think a lead of 6 for 10 remaining dailies is fair at +400 you're delusional. Barring extreme unluck, that kind of gap isn't likely to be made up in 10 dailies; +4000 is probably closer to the true odds and most likely way too low given the variance to be expected in tourney.Hmm, your math is a little off. I posted this yesterday when there were 10 dailies left & a lead of 6 before my 11pm tourney. The offer was for yesterday & odds were quite fair, as Andywend stated above. Obviously the odds would need to be adjusted daily, which I'm not interested in doing.
As far as caring about how many cashes, you're reading too much into it. Was simply a prop bet. Although smart players like Eberetta & myself obviously put more emphasis on cashing. Not that you're in any position to criticize, as I don't see your name anywhere on the leader board.
I'll concede there's an argument to be made for an emphasis on cashing: if you're aware you lack the skill to succeed against the better players who usually populate a final table, then you're better off going for frequent smaller cashes. I wasn't aware that they gave out prizes for scraping out tiny cashes and clinging to the bottom of a leaderboard, but congrats for doing so even when there's no benefit to it. However, most people measure poker skill by win rate, as opposed to overall winnings. Congratulations on your dedication and willingness to hang on just past the bubble, but I'll stick with having a much higher winrate than you (my 28.4k mCS to your 16.5k)
Comment -
bobby.... don't penetrate with long ron..... he will own u!Comment -
Lack of skill? Guarantee I've made more final tables than you. You hang on to that high win rate, I'll stick to consistently cashing.Comment -
Maybe you have? I dunno, but as I said above, there's a reason that 1st place is significantly more rewarding than 10th...number of cashes doesn't demonstrate much besides ability to hang on till blinded out. I'm not talking about tournament winrate, I'm talking overall points won in poker, an area where you're way behind me and most of the others on that leaderboard.Comment -
Ok, let's talk overall pts won in poker (2013). According to my records, I currently have 19,090. Now if you had more pts won as you claim, then it stands to reason you would obviously be on leader board ranked ahead of me. The problem with your argument is, I'm hard pressed to find you on the top 15 leader board.Comment -
What you're referring to is points won from tournaments (of which I only have 17k); as you've correctly figured out, this is why I'm not on the leaderboard and not in the running for the $0 and 0 points to be handed out to members of the prestigous leaderboard. Might be interesting to note that it took me half as many cashes to get there.
What I'm talking about is overall points won in poker...I thought I was being clear enough, but perhaps not. To clarify, that's dailies, weekend tournaments (which I hardly ever play), special tourneys and ring games. In this regard, the difference between you and me is massive; it's about as many points as you've won in tourneys all this year. The winrates I quoted above are accurate, and give you a good idea of how your winrate stacks up to mine. Again, congratulations for hanging on in the dailies for mincashes; call me old fashioned, but I prefer a strategy that gets me more points for my time, and this strategy seems to be working quite a bit better than yours
In the end it's all pretty meaningless trying to judge these things on SBR...it's only concrete if you have data which we don't have available to us. My point is that when there's 0 incentive to being on a leaderboard, you can't make the assumption that it's a terribly accurate guage of skill even for just tourneys. Or rather, you can make that assumption, but you come out looking a little foolish. Offering ridiculously low odds on something where you're an overwhelming favorite even if you don't log in to play, and believing those odds are fair, makes you look downright dense
Comment -
GIVE IT TO EM', RON!!!! Last beatdown I witnessed that was that strong is when I had Centy's skanks licking each other's asses of my c_ck, and beggin for more!!!! In the somewhat modified freestyle rap of the Diesel towards kobe, "tell me how each other's asses taste"!!!What you're referring to is points won from tournaments (of which I only have 17k); as you've correctly figured out, this is why I'm not on the leaderboard and not in the running for the $0 and 0 points to be handed out to members of the prestigous leaderboard. Might be interesting to note that it took me half as many cashes to get there.
What I'm talking about is overall points won in poker...I thought I was being clear enough, but perhaps not. To clarify, that's dailies, weekend tournaments (which I hardly ever play), special tourneys and ring games. In this regard, the difference between you and me is massive; it's about as many points as you've won in tourneys all this year. The winrates I quoted above are accurate, and give you a good idea of how your winrate stacks up to mine. Again, congratulations for hanging on in the dailies for mincashes; call me old fashioned, but I prefer a strategy that gets me more points for my time, and this strategy seems to be working quite a bit better than yours
In the end it's all pretty meaningless trying to judge these things on SBR...it's only concrete if you have data which we don't have available to us. My point is that when there's 0 incentive to being on a leaderboard, you can't make the assumption that it's a terribly accurate guage of skill even for just tourneys. Or rather, you can make that assumption, but you come out looking a little foolish. Offering ridiculously low odds on something where you're an overwhelming favorite even if you don't log in to play, and believing those odds are fair, makes you look downright denseComment -
You say the difference is massive, however you conveniently leave out the simple fact I don't play weekends or ring games. I don't waste my time on these, as I roll my pts quickly & efficiently in Omaha H/L.
I was obviously referring to the only thing I play (daily tournies), where you're not in the picture. For the record, I will take five 8th place finishes instead of one win any time. The amount of pts won is similar. However it proves consistency, not relying on a lucky win.Comment -
Good for you.... let's see you win the Championship mf, then talk to me.Comment -
Just as youconveniently leave out that you're just barely bubbling in a non-existent leaderboard contest with 0 prizes? Are you starting to see what I mean about the leaderboard being meaningless? Even if you're struggling with that, surely you can figure out that the number of cashes is meaningless noise? The entire point of a prize structure is that (5) 8th places is NOT better than (1) first place...although I'll concede it shows constistency in the same way that any mediocre player will be consistent; again, not exactly something to thump your chest about, nor is rolling in Omaha h/l
So you don't "waste your time" on ring games, and I don't "waste my time" trying desparately to mincash in daily after daily...and yet despite both of us choosing to focus our time in certain ways, I'd won far more points than you. I'm not "in the picture" for sure...but you're missing the point that the picture is an arbitrary leaderboard with no reason to motivate anyone to want to be on it. I think SBR would do well to change that, but as it stands now, it's similar to every one of their other contests: by and large, it measures ability to play consistently far more than skill (as you seem to be proving). On top of all that, the leaderboard is led by people who are both consistent players AND play well...the large disparity between their stats and your own is very telling
If you think the difference between 1st and 8th is luck even 20% of the time, you haven't been paying much attention around here...but I can't say I'm surprised.
The original point of this thread is still garbage: you thinking +400 are fair odds for the situation is either you trying to scam people (doubtful, you don't seem the type), a simple math error (perhaps) or you not having any concept of how tourneys work or what proper odds should be (becoming more and more likely with every post you make).
TL;DR Summary: you apparently don't know much about poker odds, and you should think twice (or more) before bragging about beating somoene in a contest that doesn't exist
Comment -
I simply posted a prop bet. If you don't like the odds, then you did the right thing laying off. But to comment like you did about cashes & pts was out of line. And to minimize the accomplishment of being in the top 15, just because you're not on it & there's no prizes speaks volumes.
Since you're bent on making this an I'm better than you contest, I'll just link a contest that clearly does exist: http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/2726048-sbr-poker-championship-only-strong-will-survive.html?slf=36
Comment -
See you at the tables chump.Comment -
I assumed they were close to even but he's cashed in 8 more tourneys with only 8 to go? Anyone who makes this bet has a right to stiff because Auto Donk failed to disclose he was so far ahead of his opponent. What a scumbag?Hrm...8 more dailies and he needs to cash all of them, with you cashing none? Don't you think maybe +4000 would be somewhat fairer odds?
Aside from that, why would you care how many cashes you have compared to how many points you won? You've got way more cashes and way fewer points won compared to the rest of the list...not something to be all that proud of unless you're eberettaComment -
How about posting some odds for the field, against you winning the championship. I'll gladly throw down my 6,600 pt stack on that. Problem is, a broke dik like you can't afford to pay out bet when you lose.Comment -
My primary point was that your odds were insanely low. You responded that I shouldn't comment because I'm not on the leaderboard, I tried to inform you why that is irrelevant. Not sure how that's out*of line.I simply posted a prop bet. If you don't like the odds, then you did the right thing laying off. But to comment like you did about cashes & pts was out of line. And to minimize the accomplishment of being in the top 15, just because you're not on it & there's no prizes speaks volumes.
Since you're bent on making this an I'm better than you contest, I'll just link a contest that clearly does exist: http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/2726048-sbr-poker-championship-only-strong-will-survive.html?slf=36
Thanks for the link, which clearly shows that when there's a benefit to being on a leaderboard, people will try to be on it, and it will be determined more by who plays often than pure skill. As we can see, you, me, and 73 others are currently all getting the same reward for being in the top 75. But if you feel better thinking that a higher spot means something despite the clearly outlined reasons why that is not the case, keep grinding out those min cashes and go for it...you won't be the first or the last.Comment -
Bobby, you are wrong pal.
no more discussion neededComment -
Bobby is a known stiff.Comment -
Bobby, the problem is not just that you gave terrible odds but that you didn't include yours and Stefan's cash totals in the original post, which you easily could have, so it makes it seem like youre trying to trick people into making a lazy bet without going to the trouble of checking. I mean those odds are ridiculously terrible, you have to know virtually nobody would bet it if you included the current cashes. So not including it kinda makes it seem like youre being shady
Basically all you had to do was include the relevant info within the post offering the bet. When you don't, and it turns out the bet you're offering is terrible, people are gonna question your intentions, it's just common senseComment -
I have no idea what you're talking about, clearly you can see the relevant info in post #1 link. Bottom line is if you don't like the odds, don't make the bet. I don't need to justify my line to anyone. No need for anyone to complain about odds & deflect into other irrelevant subject matters.Comment
