fgk42
New Member
Numbers – Probability – Playing the odds
I thought I’d throw out some of the statistics that I’ve heard on this issue. In 2003, your odds of dying from an injury were 1 in 1,755.
Your odds of dying from a motor vehicle accident were 1 in 6,050.
Your odds of dying from a handgun incident were 1 in 24,400 while your odds of dying from a drug overdose were 1 in 31,508
In case you ever wondered what the odds of dying from a poisonous snake bite are, here’s the website:
http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
You see odds are good for large groups and they tend to give us a “big picture” outlook. So when something happens to us and we mention it to others sometimes we get sympathy, sometimes we get annoyance, mostly we just get blank stares.
When you play a game, like TBJ a certain way/style/fashion and then notice that it’s not working any longer you have a couple of choices:
1. Continue with your style – blame variance problems and just “wait it out”
2. Analyze what has changed to produce such a different result
So you go back and review your playing habits/style. You see that you are still doing an aggressive progression game that should be working. I mean after all you’ve based this style of play upon Stanford Wong’s CTS book. You wait until you lose a hand, then bet 1/7, 1/3 and finally all-in. According to the grandfather of TBJ you've got an 86% of winning one of these bet...
Finally it dawns on when you realize that the reason that your aggressive progression style of play is not having the same results. Why?
For more go to my blog for the latest
I thought I’d throw out some of the statistics that I’ve heard on this issue. In 2003, your odds of dying from an injury were 1 in 1,755.
Your odds of dying from a motor vehicle accident were 1 in 6,050.
Your odds of dying from a handgun incident were 1 in 24,400 while your odds of dying from a drug overdose were 1 in 31,508
In case you ever wondered what the odds of dying from a poisonous snake bite are, here’s the website:
http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
You see odds are good for large groups and they tend to give us a “big picture” outlook. So when something happens to us and we mention it to others sometimes we get sympathy, sometimes we get annoyance, mostly we just get blank stares.
When you play a game, like TBJ a certain way/style/fashion and then notice that it’s not working any longer you have a couple of choices:
1. Continue with your style – blame variance problems and just “wait it out”
2. Analyze what has changed to produce such a different result
So you go back and review your playing habits/style. You see that you are still doing an aggressive progression game that should be working. I mean after all you’ve based this style of play upon Stanford Wong’s CTS book. You wait until you lose a hand, then bet 1/7, 1/3 and finally all-in. According to the grandfather of TBJ you've got an 86% of winning one of these bet...
Finally it dawns on when you realize that the reason that your aggressive progression style of play is not having the same results. Why?
For more go to my blog for the latest
