Only 10% of players winners in long run??

[UATrewqaz]

I have been reading and thinking on this and have found alot of people that say over the long term only 10% of players will be profitably in ring limit games... this stat is very sobering.

I'm pretty good but am no way in the best 10% of players, maybe top 35% at best.

If true doesn't this mean at a table of 10 players only the BEST player at the table is expected to be profitably?

Thoughts/opinions?

[bottomset]

its the best 10% at each level, and its likely only 7-8%

final verdict: the rake is a bitch

[Kumubou]

Two things:

1) The rake at low limits blows ass (and whoever says ######## is not worth it at small stakes is an idiot).

2) The majority of the 'casual playing' population plays much worse than anyone can ever fathom. You see it every day, but it is bigger than any of us think.

-K

[TripleH68]

Sometimes after playing 5-10 at Greektown in Detroit for six hours - I stop and think about just how much money has been taken off the table. Rake is 10% to $5 plus $1 for the bad beat jackpot.

[Paxosmotic]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty good but am no way in the best 10% of players, maybe top 35% at best.

[/ QUOTE ]
You can't honestly believe this, can you? When you sit down at a .5/1 table, look around. Can you find 3 players at the table better than you are? I think it's a little easier to be in the top 10% than you're giving it credit for. Take a look at a preflop hand chart and apply it and you're already in the top 30% practically.

[UATrewqaz]

Well I guess I may be higher than 35% just because the vast majority suck so bad, but the best 10% is still just the best player at the current table.

With my table selection skills this is normally me, or at least 2nd or 3rd best, but you guys aer right about the rake, it's just terrible at low limits, I have to get out of the micros and into medium stakes.

We NEED online poker legalized bad, a nice US company starting a micro rake site, competion, etc.

[Aaron W.]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been reading and thinking on this and have found alot of people that say over the long term only 10% of players will be profitably in ring limit games... this stat is very sobering.

I'm pretty good but am no way in the best 10% of players, maybe top 35% at best.

If true doesn't this mean at a table of 10 players only the BEST player at the table is expected to be profitably?

Thoughts/opinions?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a statement of absolute profitability (meaning that 0.0001 BB/100 is still "making a profit")? I have a tough time believing this. If you mean substantially profitable, I have an easier time believing it.

I think the cutoff for any profit would be around 25-30% at the micros. You might also be thinking about a statistic referring to mid-level games and up, where the competition makes fewer outright stupid mistakes. The micro games are incredibly soft and profit-making is much easier.

[benkath1]

Thank god for bonus whoring. Do you count that into your profits, or is only profit from table time? I wonder how that changes the %.

[UATrewqaz]

I finally got to the point where my winnings exceed my bonuses, but the bonuses have helped my bankroll alot. I've been killing .5/1 and 1/2 and that combined with bonuses have left me way overbankrolled for 1/2 but I'm not comfortable at 2/4 yet, so I plug away at 1/2 for now, espeically considering I haven't played enough hands there yet to "verify" I'm winning. I beat .5/1 for 12K hands at about 3.2 BB /100 and have been doing 3.6 BB /100 at 1/2 for the past 5K hands, I wanna sustain that till about 10-15K,t hen I'llb e comfortably bankrolled for 2/4 and feel like I'm ready.

But being in the top 10% of all players is pretty demanding... easy at .5/1 just because if you know to fold A6o UTG that probably makes you 80%...

I guess it's because swings already bother me at lower limits and against tougher competition they should be worse when the cards are unkind.

[Rev. Good Will]

[ QUOTE ]
We NEED online poker legalized bad, a nice US company starting a micro rake site, competion, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know....

poker legalization----->US gov taxes the [censored] out of it------>rake is essentially the same

[Greg J]

90% of the players don't put in the time and effort needed to be long term winners, so I think 10% might be right. It's just speculation though, though certainly informed speculation on the part of 2p2ers.

Hey, it takes more than solid table play to make a player a winner. It takes bankroll discipline and game selection too. Many "winning players" end up going bust by taking outrageous shots on short bankrolls. Others are losers in life by having problems with drugs, alchohol and/or gambling addictions.

Perhaps the greatest poker player ever at the table was a losing player. His name? Stu Ungar.

[UATrewqaz]

Ya I read the beginning and end (best parts!) of his biography. I think it's quite clear he had the best poker PLAYING skills of all time. He unfortunately had none of the other tools necessary to be successful (discipline, self-control, etc.)

I'd love to play a session of poker through his eyes/mind though, just once.