What's your hypothetical winrate at table one?

[SNOWBALL138]

If you sat at table one with Jen, Phil, Doyle, Barry, Chau, Chip, and Ted Forrest what would your winrate be?

[jba]

I can't believe you're not even going to let me claim I can win at that game?

this poll is only interesting if you let us be unrealistic.

[dogmeat]

I'm afraid you don't have a negative number high enough for me.

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm afraid you don't have a negative number high enough for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[OrangeKing]

Hmm...considering that, as a default strategy, I could just fold the blinds every hand (.75 BB per rotation), and we'd be lucky to get 40 hands in an hour, I can't see losing more than -3BB/hr. Since I'd probably at least pick up the blinds or more once in a while just by playing very tight and only playing the biggest hands, I'm going with -2BB/hr or so.

[Guthrie]

Since at that table, I'd clearly be the fish, I'd probably triple up and send them all home bitching about all the bad beats and suckouts.

I suggest trying to do so against Phil. You get the added benefit of a really great tempertantrum story.

[arod15]

would be real bad....

[fnord_too]

[ QUOTE ]
Hmm...considering that, as a default strategy, I could just fold the blinds every hand (.75 BB per rotation), and we'd be lucky to get 40 hands in an hour, I can't see losing more than -3BB/hr. Since I'd probably at least pick up the blinds or more once in a while just by playing very tight and only playing the biggest hands, I'm going with -2BB/hr or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you can improve on this by taking as much time as allowed on each decision.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm...considering that, as a default strategy, I could just fold the blinds every hand (.75 BB per rotation), and we'd be lucky to get 40 hands in an hour, I can't see losing more than -3BB/hr. Since I'd probably at least pick up the blinds or more once in a while just by playing very tight and only playing the biggest hands, I'm going with -2BB/hr or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you can improve on this by taking as much time as allowed on each decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder if this is why people act so slow in my games...

[ QUOTE ]
I suggest trying to do so against Phil. You get the added benefit of a really great tempertantrum story.

[/ QUOTE ]

By Phil, he means Ivey, Helmuth doesn't play at table one, and I've never seen Ivey throw a tantrum.

[UATrewqaz]

If you picked up AA surely you wouldn't fold....

This question is impossible to answer even in a hypothetical way. Therefore, I want to vote for none of the above.

[SNOWBALL138]

Larry,

This question is very far from impossible to answer.

In the broad sense that you are asking it, I believe it is. Of course it is not impossible to answer. But the answer to the question would involve having long term results against each of these players in which case, you could mathematically determine a close winrate in this game.

By no means am I saying I am right and you are wrong either. If I am missing something, please let me know.

By the way, if that is Helmuth and not Ivey, I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of posters on this site could have a positive winrate in that game. I am assuming it is Ivey.

Also, what games are we talking about. Different games have different variances which would lead to different winrates, wether they be negative or just further negative.

Id make all of them go broke so they can feel like there really pros again.

[ QUOTE ]
If you sat at table one with Jen, Phil, Doyle, Barry, Chau, Chip, and Ted Forrest what would your winrate be?

[/ QUOTE ]
It depends on if you mean Phil Hellmuth or Phil Ivey.

Actually, no. No it doesn't. You could mean Phil Donahue and I'm still clicking on -3BB/hr.