I made a post in MHNL (where I normally post) and realized maybe probability forum was better suited for it. (Then again, maybe not, as this is not about probability [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]) I dont know if anyone wants to tackle the problem, as I dont really have much mathematical framework to work with, but: Many people always try to determine successful winrates. No one really knows what certain sustainable rates are, esp. for higher stakes games.
My conjecture, and it wasnt even stated that well, is one way to determine the "tops" winrate was to find the worst winrate, (over the long haul) and from that draw a conclusion that because poker is a zero sum (or negative sum, with the rake, so +Winrate would be < (-) -Lossrate) that the worst rate would match up with the best way.
I had an idea for finding that lowest rate, but once again, not really sure (it's stated in my post) if I was / am on the right path.
So, if anyone wants a hack at it, here's the
Link to the original post