slapdash Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 In case anybody wants some bedtime reading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valiant23 Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments Interesting, but of course everyone knows that using the Wigner Distribution in these circumstances is, quite frankly, laughable and as such this tudy should be treated with the contempt it deserves. Oh, and the way they calculate the the decay rate due to the all in processes! :eyes To think they call themselves academics. :( I saw no mention of the more important aspects of poker which include the decay rate of the muffin over the time of a deep stack tournament such as the Circus £40 buy in (Stoke), nor did I see any reference to 72os. Terrible. :@ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted April 10, 2007 Author Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments Interesting' date=' but of course everyone knows that using the Wigner Distribution in these circumstances is, quite frankly, laughable and as such this tudy should be treated with the contempt it deserves.[/quote'] I don't think you read it carefully enough. The Wigner Distribution was only mentioned when he was discussing what he himself called the "unrealistic q=0 case", and not when he discussed the more realistic "q>0 case". Yes, obviously in the latter case using the Wigner Distribution is laughable, but, to be fair, I think he realized that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galronix Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments Perfect for my insomnia. :ok :zzz :zzz :zzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valiant23 Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments I don't think you read it carefully enough. The Wigner Distribution was only mentioned when he was discussing what he himself called the "unrealistic q=0 case", and not when he discussed the more realistic "q>0 case". Yes, obviously in the latter case using the Wigner Distribution is laughable, but, to be fair, I think he realized that. See. Thats why you're the pofessor and I'm a cabbie courier. :D :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slapdash Posted April 10, 2007 Author Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments See. Thats why you're the pofessor and I'm a cabbie courier. :D :lol What? Because I can bluff more convincingly than you? :dude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick mick Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments "In this Letter, we study a very human and futile activity: poker tournaments." Pretty much sums up my recent endeavours:sad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColU_FC Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments See. Thats why you're the pofessor and I'm a cabbie courier. :D :lol Did you miss an 'o' or an 'r' Mr V? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valiant23 Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Re: The statistical physics of poker tournaments What? Because I can bluff more convincingly than you? :dudeYeah! and dance better. :lol Did you miss an 'o' or an 'r' Mr V? I suppose I missed "r".... unless Slappy knocks me out of something else. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.