You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
I was on Blonde (no.......not on a blonde) and I think you called.
Did manage by reading about 20 threads to track you all down and see the omaha fiasco. Why didn't you all just keep raising the pot. I can't leave you lot alone for a minute.
Still, a great experiment, well done all..... eventually!
I think that we may need to repeat the exercise and go aipf on the 3rd hand after making sure that the chips are even at this stage in order to have conclusive proof.
Here is the hand from today:
ckd, I would be putting this in the bad beat section if I was you, disgusting. Was Bland not part of the experiment?
and i will 'accidently' fold like phil12uk did in the tp round robbin on tuesday
(i know he called but it will still be by mistake!! honest;))
I think it would help if a invite only 30p DYM table could be arranged, then 6 players who expresed an interest in joining the experiment could take part, so that way only the players who know what is happening could take part, I would be happy to take part if it could be done
I await the thread that he will start in the "Poker Strategy" section; it will make a nice change from the threads complaining about people who "sit-out" the early stages of DYMs!
The approach that we took was only to find one example that agreed with your theory.
This method can generally only be used to disprove a theory, i.e. by finding an instance where the results don't match those predicted by the theory.
We would need to see the alogorithm that SkyPoker uses in order to prove your theory. :-)
The approach that we took was only to find one example that agreed with your theory.
This method can generally only be used to disprove a theory, i.e. by finding an instance where the results don't match those predicted by the theory.
We would need to see the alogorithm that SkyPoker uses in order to prove your theory. :-)
Technically, what science deals with are hypotheses. A theory is a hypothesis which has been well supported by experiments. However, hypotheses, and even theories, are most always considered to be tentative. That is, it is always allowed that some valid experiment could show that the hypotheses is incorrect, either wholly or in part (referred to as falsifiability), so that it must be rejected or modified. So in science, absolute proof is usually impossible. Essentially it would require proving a universal negative: this hypothesis does not fail under any circumstance. And as they say, to prove a universal negative requires universal knowledge. A hypothesis which is not "falsifiable" is not generally considered to be scientific. That's not the same as being untrue; there might be any number of truths which are all the same beyond the reach of science.
Hope That Helps ....Lol
However, in my branch of science (i.e. mathematics) there are many theories that are proved and there are many different methods of proving those theories.
I hope that this helps. :-)))
However, we could give you books full of explanation of how likely it was that the theory was correct.
Mind you, I know of at least one regular poster on here who would still complain. ;-)
You're welcome to join in further experiments but I must warn you that the pay is poor; on the other hand, obviously, you do get a warm glow of satisfaction from being a part of the movement to expand mankind's knowledge.
If we manage to get government funding then life will be perfect.
A very scientific Errrrr Mathmatic answer (Keep doing the numbers)