Is bobby duckign DS?

[Robber]

Addressed your ignorance in post #63.

100% false

Try again... if you can.

Your offer isn't saving him anything. Time value of money. Now vs 7 months from now.

You either really are this dumb or you play dumb to scam people


Every offer you've made is a blatant rip off

[bobbywaves]

Every offer I've made has been more than fair.

7 months from now Triple will be banging his head against my "brick wall," about not accepting my generous offer.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Every offer I've made has been more than fair.

7 months from now Triple will be banging his head against my "brick wall," about not accepting my generous offer.

Nope, but you're too dumb to realize you're wrong about th first, which qualifies you as a brick wall

[bobbywaves]

Nope, but you're too dumb to realize you're wrong about th first, which qualifies you as a brick wall

With your constant arguing, apparently you're too dumb to realize whose winning our challenge. Let me give you a hint: It's not you, & it's not even close.

Most people are humbled by an ass whipping. But not Triple, he's just oblivious to reality. Continues talking trash & always needs the last word, despite the beat down Waves has provided.

Now if the deck smacks you in the face the next couple months & you somehow take the lead, by all means talk all the smack you want. At that point you earned it & can at least back up what you say, it will also provide motivation for myself. But until that happens, you're making a complete ass out of yourself by continuing to engage.

Don't look now, but Tidal Waves is turning the tide in your ignorant poll. People are obviously becoming informed, all are not the gullible sheep you were hoping for. You may want to shut that poll down before December, or you'll end up losing that as well as challenge.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Bobbo, your terrible play style is obvious, and independent of your run-good

As for the poll...you've got a guy who voted in the wrong spot, a guy who's been here less than a month, and presumably the other couple just couldn't be bothered to read up on the facts. Despite that, overwhelming opinion aligns with facts and is not in "Tidal Waves'" favor (I assume the nickname is ironic given how little of a splash you make in the poker community? )

[bobbywaves]

Beg to differ, my style of play is what helps create good runs. Not independent at all, they actually go hand in hand. You may learn that one day, when you reach my status level.

Let me check who can possibly be stupid enough to vote in the wrong spot?.......I'm sure TheCentaur knew exactly what he was doing. But then again, his ignorance wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[Mitchell88]

[Mitchell88]

***** Hand history (v1.2) *****
Hand ID 4247721
$0 + $10 Texas Hold'em (No Limit) - 21:09:00 19/05/2014 ET
Table 'Table 54254', 10 seats max, Real money
Seat 7 is the button. Small Blind $10, Big Blind $20
Note: seat IDs range from 1 to 10
Seat 1 (playing) : downsouth, amount $1500, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 2 (playing) : mitchell88, amount $220, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 3 (playing) : ProPicker713, amount $2140, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 4 (playing) : itsmemrmatte, amount $1970, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 5 (playing) : blackbart, amount $1420, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 6 (playing) : hhsilver, amount $1510, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 7 (playing) : d2bets, amount $1530, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
Seat 8 (playing) : thetrinity, amount $1710, amount bet $0, penalty (None)
thetrinity: Small Blind ($10)
downsouth: Big Blind ($20)
** Dealing Down Cards **
Dealt to mitchell88: [Qh, 4s]
mitchell88: Raise [btn] ($220)
ProPicker713: Fold
itsmemrmatte: Fold
blackbart: Fold
hhsilver: Fold
d2bets: Fold
thetrinity: Call ($210)
downsouth: Fold
mitchell88: Show Cards ($0)
thetrinity: Show Cards ($0)
** Dealing Flop **
Community cards: [8s, 9c, 8c]
** Dealing Turn **
Community cards: [Jh]
** Dealing River **
Community cards: [3c]
** End Round **
** Evaluate **
thetrinity: Show Cards ($0)
mitchell88: Show Cards ($0)
** Showdown **
Main pot $460, Rake $0
Summary mitchell88: bet $220, won $0, net $-220
Summary thetrinity: bet $220, won $460, net $240, HoleCards [8h, 8d], HiHand [four of a kind, eights] [8s, 8h, 8d, 8c, Jh], won $460 from main pot

that's what happens when you don't spend your whole life here, good choice mods you fuckin retards

[Triple_D_Bet]

Beg to differ, my style of play is what helps create good runs. Not independent at all, they actually go hand in hand. You may learn that one day, when you reach my status level.

Let me check who can possibly be stupid enough to vote in the wrong spot?.......I'm sure TheCentaur knew exactly what he was doing. But then again, his ignorance wouldn't surprise me in the least.

That's your opinion bobbo, one not shared by anyone else it seems

As for centy, he actually explained it in this thread (http://forum.sbrforum.com/poker/2873...l#post21791301)...but we know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit

[bobbywaves]

that's what happens when you don't spend your whole life here, good choice mods you fuckin retards

Nah, that's what happens when you overplay hands like Q,4 off. Consequently, your last place finish is not surprising. But keep blaming the mods for your poor play, I'm sure they'll remove your doom switch asap.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Nah, that's what happens when you overplay hands like Q,4 off. Consequently, your last place finish is not surprising. But keep blaming the mods for your poor play, I'm sure they'll remove your doom switch asap.

You should avoid using terms you don't understand, such as "overplay", "ROI", etc. Just some friendly advice....nobody really expects you to know any better, but it makes you look even dumber when you mangle common poker vocabulary

Similarly, you should avoid giving poker advice...we all know what you would have done in mitch's place: fold until you picked up QQ or better or were blinded out. We've had to give up on trying to teach you the easy way, and it doesn't even seem you'll learn anything when your terrible play loses you 20k+ points....which is good news for everyone who ever finds themselves at a table with you I suppose

[bobbywaves]

Coming from a guy losing our challenge by 2,200+. Keep living in your fantasy land Triple. Reality will smack you in the face on January 1st, when you're transferring 29k into my account.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Coming from a guy losing our challenge by 2,200+. Keep living in your fantasy land Triple. Reality will smack you in the face on January 1st, when you're transferring 29k into my account.

Having a temporary lead in a contest that's far from over does't change the fact you have no clue what you're talking about

[bobbywaves]

There's been nothing temporary about the lead, it hasn't changed hands once in 5 months.

I'm confident that I'll lead challenge from start to finish, there's been nothing about your poker play to suggest otherwise.

[Triple_D_Bet]

There's been nothing temporary about the lead, it hasn't changed hands once in 5 months.

I'm confident that I'll lead challenge from start to finish, there's been nothing about your poker play to suggest otherwise.

There's nothing temporary about your terrible play either, and it shows you lack a grasp of the most basic concepts of the game. Given that (and the ridiculous examples of your off-the-wall beliefs, such as "ROI"), you'll have to excuse me if I don't give much weight to the opinions of a guy who can't handle a poker game where the stakes are more than 50 cents

[bobbywaves]

There's nothing temporary about your terrible play either, and it shows you lack a grasp of the most basic concepts of the game.

I'll break this down in layman's terms, so you can easily comprehend. If there's "nothing temporary about my terrible play," how do you trail my "terrible play" by 2,200+? Given this fact, it's impossible to perceive your play superior to mine.

I'm getting tired of burying you on a daily basis. If you take lead, talk all you want. Until then it's in your best interest to keep mouth shut, as your foot keeps getting stuck.

[Triple_D_Bet]

I'll break this down in layman's terms, so you can easily comprehend. If there's "nothing temporary about my terrible play," how do you trail my "terrible play" by 2,200+? Given this fact, it's impossible to perceive your play superior to mine.

I'm getting tired of burying you on a daily basis. If you take lead, talk all you want. Until then it's in your best interest to keep mouth shut, as your foot keeps getting stuck.

The simple answer to your question has been given to you several times, but you're not knowledgeable enough to understand or believe it (or the related concept, that terrible play is independent of performance). However, even a micro-stakes nit like yourself should be able to realize the hypocrisy/inconsistency in claiming less than 12 months doesn't count if you're losing to DS, but if you're winning vs. me, is indicative of skill.

[bobbywaves]

There's no inconsistency, since DS would be losing after 5 months just like you are.

Terrible play is not independent of performance. You can get away with terrible play for a little while due to luck, but eventually your luck runs out over time & skill prevails. That's why I prefer a 12 month challenge, as it removes any luck factor you may have.

However, 5 months is a solid sample size & strong indicator how challenge is going & how it will finish.

[Triple_D_Bet]

There's no inconsistency, since DS would be losing after 5 months just like you are.

Disproven multiple times, despite your inability to comprehend it.

Terrible play is not independent of performance.

It is actually; there are correct and incorrect plays, and they don't require empirical evidence to make them so. But if you were capable of understanding that, there'd be no reason for this poll...so by all means carry on with your selective understanding (as demonstrated by your constant misquoting of the small portions of replies you think you can understand)

However, 5 months is a solid sample size & strong indicator how challenge is going & how it will finish.

How strange, you've never felt 5 months was good enough when you didn't have a lead...looks like you're once again trying to revise your definitions of success. It would be one thing if you were at least wrong in the same way consistently, but you seem determined to be incorrect in as many different ways as possible...it might be impressive if we didn't know how much time you have on your hands

[bobbywaves]

Disproven multiple times, despite your inability to comprehend it.

Proven multiple times here, despite your inability to comprehend it: http://www.sbrforum.com/poker/

How strange, you've never felt 5 months was good enough when you didn't have a lead.

How strange, another from you... I was never in a challenge before lasting 5 months, let alone be trailing.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Proven multiple times here, despite your inability to comprehend it: http://www.sbrforum.com/poker/



How strange, another from you... I was never in a challenge before lasting 5 months, let alone be trailing.

You clinging to the ass end of the leaderboard for a few more days proves nothing, while DS destroying you every time he's had any kind of reason to care or play consistently says everything. He didn't even have a contest with you for last years world cup and he crushed you; he crushed you when you went heads up with him on your own terms (despite him running ice cold), and anyone with a clue could see he'd do the same to you in any longer contest as well.

Correct, you were never in a 5 month challenge...because you insisted that 6 and 7 months wasn't enough to be conclusive of skill. And yet here you are claiming 5 months is...

[bobbywaves]

You clinging to the ass end of the leaderboard for a few more days proves nothing

Proves everything, as you & DS are nowhere to be found on leaderboard.

Correct, you were never in a 5 month challenge...because you insisted that 6 and 7 months wasn't enough to be conclusive of skill. And yet here you are claiming 5 months is

Yet you previously said "you've never felt 5 months was good enough when you didn't have a lead." How is that possible, when I was never in a challenge over 2 months long?

I never insisted 6 or 7 months wasn't conclusive of skill, I simply preferred not to start another challenge on top of ours mid year. As you know I prefer annual challenges starting in January, which DS is more than welcome to join. Just like he was welcome last January.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Proves everything, as you & DS are nowhere to be found on leaderboard.

By the same logic, you wouldn't be on a weekly leaderboard for the last 2 weeks, so that must prove everything right? What about DS crushing you year after year for a even larger sample size? How does Bobbo's Law rationalize that one?

Yet you previously said "you've never felt 5 months was good enough when you didn't have a lead." How is that possible, when I was never in a challenge over 2 months long?

I never insisted 6 or 7 months wasn't conclusive of skill, I simply preferred not to start another challenge on top of ours mid year. As you know I prefer annual challenges starting in January, which DS is more than welcome to join. Just like he was welcome last January.

You ducked DS time after time when he suggested 8 months, 7 months and 6 months, insisting 12 months was the gold standard for skill to shine through (more complicated than that but it's beyond your understanding, as you've demonstrated for us). Follow along closely bobbo: if you a refuse longer contests because they're not conclusive of skill, but b) insist a shorter time period is, you're c) an idiot.

[bobbywaves]

By the same logic, you wouldn't be on a weekly leaderboard for the last 2 weeks, so that must prove everything right? What about DS crushing you year after year for a even larger sample size?

Your logic is way off as usual Tripe: I posted an annual leaderboard, which is relevant with an annual challenge. Even if a weekly leaderboard existed, it would obviously have no relevance in an annual challenge. DS hasn't crushed me every year. I was banned for parts of 2011 & 2012. Last year was my first full year of playing & I finished in the top 10, just about where I rank for 2014. That's called consistency.

Fact of the matter is you need to constantly compare DS with me, since you've never beaten me...or made an annual leaderboard for that matter.

You ducked DS time after time when he suggested 8 months, 7 months and 6 months, insisting 12 months was the gold standard for skill to shine through (more complicated than that but it's beyond your understanding, as you've demonstrated for us). Follow along closely bobbo: if you a refuse longer contests because they're not conclusive of skill, but b) insist a shorter time period is, you're c) an idiot.

Try to follow Tripe: 12 months is the gold standard of skill. DS didn't meet my valid criteria of starting in January & 12 month duration. DS was offered 12 month challenge starting last January, which he refused.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Your logic is way off as usual Tripe: I posted an annual leaderboard, which is relevant with an annual challenge. Even if a weekly leaderboard existed, it would obviously have no relevance in an annual challenge. DS hasn't crushed me every year. I was banned for parts of 2011 & 2012. Last year was my first full year of playing & I finished in the top 10, just about where I rank for 2014. That's called consistency.

Fact of the matter is you need to constantly compare DS with me, since you've never beaten me...or made an annual leaderboard for that matter.

So when you're beating DS because he doesn't play, he's a chump you're crushing...when he beats you cause you got yourself banned, then it just doesn't count? For that matter, how exactly do you call one data point "consistency"? "I finished top 15 in a contest which awarded no points one of the years I played, but the others don't count, so I'm consistently the greatest!!1!"

Try to follow Tripe: 12 months is the gold standard of skill. DS didn't meet my valid criteria of starting in January & 12 month duration. DS was offered 12 month challenge starting last January, which he refused.

So 12 months is the gold standard, but 5 is enough to prove conclusive when you're winning? Seems unlikely, as during 12 months, anyone coudl cherrypick 5 months to show either person crushing the other. Your criteria aren't valid (see my explanation above, or any of the numerous previous ones, or even the poll that shows most can see your "criteria" are just fearful excuses), and the fact that you went through half a dozen excuses before settling on them is pretty telling. One more time for ya bobbo: if you refuse longer contests because they're not conclusive of skill, but b) insist a shorter time period is, you're c) an idiot.

As I've said before, it will be interesting to see what your excuse is when you lose this one too...my money's on your new "criteriexcuse" being a 2 year+ long contest, with anything less than that just being "luck"

[bobbywaves]

it will be interesting to see what your excuse is when you lose this one too

No excuse, as I'm not losing. Finished way ahead of you last year. This year will be no different, as my 2k+ lead indicates.

[Triple_D_Bet]

No excuse, as I'm not losing. Finished way ahead of you last year. This year will be no different, as my 2k+ lead indicates.

You didn't have any excuses when you were beating DS early on too...and now that's ll we hear out of you is excuse after excuse

[bobbywaves]

You didn't have any excuses when you were beating DS early on too...and now that's ll we hear out of you is excuse after excuse

No excuses from me now either, I already played DS & will offer to play again in January. It's his own fault he's waiting, as DS had every opportunity to join last January.

Don't worry Tripe...I'm going to give you a chance to win your 29k back in 2015 challenge, because I'm a fair man like that.

[Triple_D_Bet]

No excuses from me now either, I already played DS & will offer to play again in January. It's his own fault he's waiting, as DS had every opportunity to join last January.

Don't worry Tripe...I'm going to give you a chance to win your 29k back in 2015 challenge, because I'm a fair man like that.

DS challenges you to contest for rest of the year (8 months); your excuse: "Contest has to be 12 months long"

DS agrees to go heads up with you counting points from January, giving you a 4 figure lead; your excuse: "You have to play versus other people too"

DS agrees to do a 12 month contest heads up with custom start and finish dates; your excuse: "Posting 2 screenshots is too much effort"

Ever since you lost the last contest with him, on your terms no less, you've done nothing but make excuses. January isn't a valid reason in anyone's head but your own; we know you're scared and stalling, and you should really admit it to yourself (you're the only one who doesn't seem to know already).

I might be interested in taking your points again next year, we'll have to see when we get there

[bobbywaves]

You seem to be confusing excuses with preferences. It's my preference for challenge to be 12 months & starting in January. I have my valid reasons for this, couldn't care less if you disagree.

Just like it was DS preference not to enter 2014. If someone doesn't like my preferences, they don't join challenge. Similarly...if I don't like DS preferences, I don't join.

Looking forward to go double or nothing in 2015, for another 29k.

[Triple_D_Bet]

You seem to be confusing excuses with preferences. It's my preference for challenge to be 12 months & starting in January. I have my valid reasons for this, couldn't care less if you disagree.

Just like it was DS preference not to enter 2014. If someone doesn't like my preferences, they don't join challenge. Similarly...if I don't like DS preferences, I don't join.

Looking forward to go double or nothing in 2015, for another 29k.

DS prefers not to enter a contest with me in it, and based on that (and his explicit statements) it's reasonable to assume that he doesn't want to play against me (as it would take more effort than he wants to put in). Your "preference" becomes an excuse when combined with your continued insistence that you'd beat DS (despite no evidence supporting it)...when your preference magically changes to coincide with avoiding the guy you're 100% sure you'd beat, it qualifies as an excuse

[bobbywaves]

Why wouldn't DS enter a contest with you in it? That should have been more incentive for him to join, as you suck. There would have been no extra effort involved for DS, only a bigger pot. The three of us could have been playing for months already, if it wasn't for this lame excuse. DS just didn't want to spot me the lead I earned, as I would have been beating him without the initial lead.

[Triple_D_Bet]

Why wouldn't DS enter a contest with you in it? That should have been more incentive for him to join, as you suck. There would have been no extra effort involved for DS, only a bigger pot. The three of us could have been playing for months already, if it wasn't for this lame excuse. DS just didn't want to spot me the lead I earned, as I would have been beating him without the initial lead.

Oops, wrong again bobbo..,.DS offered to spot you your current lead at the time in a heads up contest, and as he's proven, if he cared to play even semi-seriously he'd crush you just like he always has. DS didn't want to compete vs me as it would take more effort to compete vs a decent player, whereas it doesn't take as much effort to beat a timid nit like yourself. These are all things that have been explained to you repeatedly, but it appears your memory is as terrible as your poker play

[bobbywaves]

That's not going to work Tripe. But keep trying though, I'm having fun burying you:

If it "doesn't take much effort to beat a timid nit like myself," then why would you be trailing a "timid nit" by 2,300 in our annual challenge?

[Robber]

I had a few minutes before the French open so I went ahead and won both tennis contests

http://forum.sbrforum.com/tennis-betting/2887165-french-open-contest-2014-mens-singles-sponsored-titanbet-p6.html#post22027669