That’s the biggest dilemma on here. You may have seen earlier debates on whether Shannon Shorr was from LV or Alabama, and whether or not David Benyamine really was from France.

Our default was to go with whatever locale was the player’s officially declared residence was … and made a few semi-consistent changes along the way.

The trick would be to add an extra blank on whatever form players fill out — second home, or birthplace or something. Would make it sooo interesting, as we might see a real Vietnam vs. Texas kinda thing developing, since so many of the original Viets now make their home base in Cali, and Texans do so in Vegas.

But even that adds a slight level of complication. Take me, for example, if “birthplace” provided the secondary home info, I would be seen as Dan from Chicago, instead of Dan from Texas, where I really feel is home.

Or is that Poll?

What I like to do is point out that there are alternative ways to interpret the data that you see, and therefore alternatives to the conclusions you can make. I’d rather tell someone they are jumping to conclusions not supported by the facts than jump to conclusions of my own. It’s more fun that way.

By the way, the intriguing thing to me is how the “home” is determined. I mean, are you Dallas Dan or Danny Vegas?

So if the California players went out in 9th and 8th place, Cali still would have another $1.something million added to their overall stack. Oh, wait, I see what you are saying … you are right, it would be only a few hundred thousand difference that way.

Still, I didn’t even expect them to pass Nevada at all with one event to go. And because there are different ways to look at the data, we have given you multiple ways to look at it … indeed, the debate will come down to what’s more important, the actual bracelets or the money they represent.

BTW, it should be noted that Argentina and Alabama are still leading in the Alphabetical standings.

I’ll reiterate what I have always said, that you can twist statistics any way you want to make them mean what you want them to.

Dan, the split MIGHT be in the millions, might not. If they’re the first 2 bustouts, the difference is only 100K more. And whatever happens, it won’t increase the CA number of final tables and only POSSIBLY increase bracelets by 1.

What would be more telling is the percentage of people from an area that cashed in. CA has 996 cashes, but how many CAians entered the 55 events? NV has 666 cashes but how many NVdans entered the 55 events? (you do notice that the last 3 letters of Nevadan is Dan, right?)

Also, out of 996 cashes for CA, how many DIFFERENT people cashed? or was it the same people over and over.

And if one person entered many events and cashed 5 but busted out of the main event, and another entered many events but ONLY cashed in the main event, and for more money than the guy who cashed 5 times, who did better?

I can think of a million (well, maybe only 2 or 3) more questions to ask about the stats, and all of them have an affect (did I use affect/effect correctly, too/to/two/2?) on where you might think the most successful players this year are from. But you get my point. It all comes down to your opinion of what are the most important stats anyway.

I’ve said enough (probably too much)

So that means when all is said and done, the money split between them will be in the millions.

I could be missing something with the above observation, but I think Nevada is just as strong or stronger than Cali with those stats.