@deepskye don't try to act smart. That too is simple high school prob & stat. It is a logical consequence of the Gauss-curve. The reason why the inequality applies to any large (enough) set of data is more complex though and is a part of proving the Central limit theorem. As with all theoretical concepts though, I think it's not very relevant to poker meta-game, which is much more psychological.
In the video she basically used a bunch of big words to say absolutely NOTHING at all.. and yet people here think she sounds smart!?!?!? Here's news... Vanessa actually does NOT understand game theory!!!!
@dreamcircus "In the video she basically used a bunch of big words to say absolutely NOTHING at all.. and yet people here think she sounds smart!?!?!? Here's news... Vanessa actually does NOT understand game theory!!!!"
No... I agree she boasts a little but she IS intelligent.
Actually you don't get what she is saying because you don't get the big words... She didn't say "NOTHING"
she explained that you by knowing other players tendency to bluff you can optimize your betting...
All she is really saying here is that patterns are quantifiable. No shit. welcome to science. This isn't genius. If player A bluffs 60% of the time in situation B, then the correct long term decision would to be to call them EVERY time.
ill go with my reads ;)
LoveNLoot 2 months ago
wow she's a genius. no wonder she's the top female poker player in the world.
barberap 2 months ago
So thats high school statistics. Come back when you're up to chebyshev's inequality
deepskye 3 months ago
@deepskye don't try to act smart. That too is simple high school prob & stat. It is a logical consequence of the Gauss-curve. The reason why the inequality applies to any large (enough) set of data is more complex though and is a part of proving the Central limit theorem. As with all theoretical concepts though, I think it's not very relevant to poker meta-game, which is much more psychological.
zwamman 2 months ago
In the video she basically used a bunch of big words to say absolutely NOTHING at all.. and yet people here think she sounds smart!?!?!? Here's news... Vanessa actually does NOT understand game theory!!!!
dreamcircus 3 months ago
@dreamcircus "In the video she basically used a bunch of big words to say absolutely NOTHING at all.. and yet people here think she sounds smart!?!?!? Here's news... Vanessa actually does NOT understand game theory!!!!"
No... I agree she boasts a little but she IS intelligent.
Actually you don't get what she is saying because you don't get the big words... She didn't say "NOTHING"
she explained that you by knowing other players tendency to bluff you can optimize your betting...
bizbite2 3 months ago
All she is really saying here is that patterns are quantifiable. No shit. welcome to science. This isn't genius. If player A bluffs 60% of the time in situation B, then the correct long term decision would to be to call them EVERY time.
dpdfree 3 months ago
the first few seconds she reminds me of phil laak and antonio ... duke graduate mirroring degenerates ... very classy ....
pokeher26 3 months ago
i'd love to fuck her
unionboarder 3 months ago
i like you ! youre talking about good elements in the game, i take the advices and think over them some hours today :)
MouseClicksNow 4 months ago
id do you in the arse
pokerbumhard 4 months ago
bla..bbla...lets fuck
NukiChannel 5 months ago
is she a mathematics major
jc8861 5 months ago
@jc8861 no she's in law school as far as i know
baeksi34 4 months ago
hot AND smart... holy shit...
guybrush93 6 months ago 8
Bot!!!
cheapshankybot 10 months ago 9