• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Is rj right about the hot hand and the nerds are wrong?

DistrictDeacon said:
You’re fucking hysterical RJ. You put Plama up on a pedestal when it comes to poker and then try to criticize me when I say I’d rely on his opinion.

Maybe try viewing threads as a conversation instead of an attack on you.
Click to expand...

I'm "hysterical" in laughter. It's not about putting anyone on a "pedestal". He has a history of succeeding at a high level.

Here are a few articles:

https://www.raiseyourgame.com/2016/03/15/professional-rd1/

https://www.schoolofcards.com/content/know-poker-opponents

https://www.unibet.com/poker/guides/how-do-i-tell-which-poker-hand-my-opponent-has-1.784327

http://pokerinabox.com/hand-reading-skill/

There are tons more. Legendary players like Daniel Negreanu are famous for calling out what opponents have.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
But the whole point we are all making besides RJ is that it comes down to percentages as an analysis. Even if we don’t know the perfect percentage.
Click to expand...

And you dispute the flow of the game. How a player is playing and other tells.

You refuse to include any human factors.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
It’s one that’s worth discussing because of the closeness in percentages and other factors you’ve added. But the answer to your question isn’t going to be applicable to the 25 vs 40 scenario.
Click to expand...

Of course it is. The answer to my question is simply an acknowledgment that the probability of a player making a particular shot almost always differs somewhat from their shooting percentage up to that point and that often that difference can be quite large.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
And that’s the whole point. Statistics don’t tell you what’s going to happen. Just what’s most likely to happen. Make it or miss it, you still chose the less likely option if you go with B.

If you want to go with your gut, go with B. But your gut has no statically valid predictive value.
Click to expand...

How do you know? Why is A more likely to make that corner 3 than B? What’s the probability for each given the circumstances I outlined?
 
RChildress107 said:
Of course it is. The answer to my question is simply an acknowledgment that the probability of a player making a particular shot almost always differs somewhat from their shooting percentage up to that point and that often that difference can be quite large.
Click to expand...

Sure. But you have no way to systematically predict that probability other than using historic averages.
 
RJKarl said:
I'm "hysterical" in laughter. It's not about putting anyone on a "pedestal". He has a history of succeeding at a high level.

Here are a few articles:

https://www.raiseyourgame.com/2016/03/15/professional-rd1/

https://www.schoolofcards.com/content/know-poker-opponents

https://www.unibet.com/poker/guides/how-do-i-tell-which-poker-hand-my-opponent-has-1.784327

http://pokerinabox.com/hand-reading-skill/

There are tons more. Legendary players like Daniel Negreanu are famous for calling out what opponents have.
Click to expand...

Negreanu could also recite every single hand win probability in his sleep. And he’d never get those wrong, unlike a guess about his opponents hand.
 
There you go again. Denying fact to make yourself think you are correct.

What separates guys who memorize probabilities and the greats is the ability to read your opponent. But you won't admit that no matter how many articles, teachers or pros I show you.

This is very sad for you.
 
RJKarl said:
There you go again. Denying fact to make yourself think you are correct.

What separates guys who memorize probabilities and the greats is the ability to read your opponent. But you won't admit that no matter how many articles, teachers or pros I show you.

This is very sad for you.
Click to expand...

Facts like a hot hand makes a 25% shooter more likely to hit a shot than a 40% shooter?
 
DistrictDeacon said:
Facts like a hot hand makes a 25% shooter more likely to hit a shot than a 40% shooter?
Click to expand...

Facts from those articles that you asked for. Facts from experts who say playing your opponent is important.

As your nonsensical shooting concept, you've backed away from how the players are playing which is absolutely critical to answering the question.

Unsurprisingly, you have also totally dishonestly changed the parameters. I've never said anything about it being a "fact" that one shooter WILL make any specific shot. The entire discussion has been who I'd "rather" have taking that shot under cursory, specified circumstances.

I am not surprised that you can't be honest about this.
 
RJKarl said:
Facts from those articles that you asked for. Facts from experts who say playing your opponent is important.

As your nonsensical shooting concept, you've backed away from how the players are playing which is absolutely critical to answering the question.

Unsurprisingly, you have also totally dishonestly changed the parameters. I've never said anything about it being a "fact" that one shooter WILL make any specific shot. The entire discussion has been who I'd "rather" have taking that shot under cursory, specified circumstances.

I am not surprised that you can't be honest about this.
Click to expand...

Have you ever had a discussion in your life that hasn’t devolved into name calling?

The FACT is that a hot hand increases a shooters long term average by a minimal amount, low single digits. It’s your choice if you want to believe that or not.
 
You know that RJ has lost an argument when he

a) questions the integrity/intelligence of his foe, and
b) accuses his foe of disagreeing with him just because he is rj
 
Have you ever admitted you were wrong in a discussion with me?

A hot hand is NEVER about long term percentages. It's about the ONE NIGHT. The ONE GAME.

You are trying to change the concept AGAIN.

Why won't admit that when you can't defend what you say that you immediately change what was being discussed?
 
Last edited:
ChrisL68 said:
You know that RJ has lost an argument when he

a) questions the integrity/intelligence of his foe, and
b) accuses his foe of disagreeing with him just because he is rj
Click to expand...

I haven't "lost" anything. I'm the one who hasn't changed criteria over and over.
 
RChildress107 said:
Depends on the shooter
Click to expand...

That was NEVER the point. It wasn't about whether you want a 25% shooter or 40% shooter to take a shot NEXT WEEK. It was about who should take a shot TONIGHT if the 25% shooter was 4-4 and the 40% shooter was 0-4.

Then, District changed it to 3-4 and 0-5.

Then, he changed it to 3-5 vs. 0-4.

Now, he's changing it to long term.

Hang around a little while and he'll be asking if you'd want a 1-5 , 25% shooter over Steph.

Hell, he even brought up which Klay I would prefer. When I showed him there very well wouldn't be a difference in 4-6 YEARS and there was rational difference in that case, he still wouldn't relent.

He also changed multiple times about how to play poker.

These are tremendous lengths for anyone to go to rather than admit they are wrong or admit the possibility of being wrong.

He's just going to move the goalposts again.

On this thread, he's proven he's incapable of admitting his lack of knowledge and changing the criteria over and over. The only sensible conclusion is that it might cause a nervous breakdown on his part to admit I am right and he is wrong.
 
RJ will always be wrong on this, because he just conflates different arguments and doesn't understand that percentages over longer sample sizes (ABs/FGAs) are more predictive than shorter sample sizes.

I've tried many times to explain the pitcher vs hitter data argument to him, provided statistical proof, and he just sticks his fingers in his ears and plays the victim. Fun times!
 
MHBDemon said:
RJ will always be wrong on this, because he just conflates different arguments and doesn't understand that percentages over longer sample sizes (ABs/FGAs) are more predictive than shorter sample sizes.

I've tried many times to explain the pitcher vs hitter data argument to him, provided statistical proof, and he just sticks his fingers in his ears and plays the victim. Fun times!
Click to expand...

We're not talking about longer sample sizes. You don't have a hot hand for game after game. Even Steph has off games.

The difference between us is you don't believe there's a human element or anything like momentum or a hot hand. Which shows you don't understand the game.
 
RJKarl said:
And you dispute the flow of the game. How a player is playing and other tells.

You refuse to include any human factors.
Click to expand...

No I dispute that these factors make up a 10% difference or 15% or whatever you claim, which is why I asked you your thoughts earlier on a 30 v. 40% situation.
 
MHBDemon said:
RJ will always be wrong on this, because he just conflates different arguments and doesn't understand that percentages over longer sample sizes (ABs/FGAs) are more predictive than shorter sample sizes.

I've tried many times to explain the pitcher vs hitter data argument to him, provided statistical proof, and he just sticks his fingers in his ears and plays the victim. Fun times!
Click to expand...

I find this right mainly because he doesn't seem to understand a resume v. predictive evaluative tools either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top