$215: With all the 17%+ ROI winners, where are the losers coming from?

[Moonsugar]

yes

[Slim Pickens]

I think we're coming to the same conclusion. If you believe there are real 20% ROI winners out there at any level then you have to conclude that the majority of players are losing. [censored] rake.

SlimP

[BamaGambler]

My ROI in the 200s is -15%, but I've only played 68. I mostly play 100s.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Why do all 2+2ers go to vegas and play blackjack? that is clearly -ev.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do some people burn in hell? theres clearly a better way to go.. holla

[valenzuela]

I dont get ur post. Ive played blackjack in a casino as well...( I went all-in and got dealt AA , really. )

[Degen]

i don't like this at all

there are people who fall all along that spectrum, winners don't always win 20% and losers don't always lose 20%

[trdi]

I understand him. I'm not moving up without at least 100 buy-ins. Oh, ok, you can do that on lower buy-ins. I guess $500 is ok for 11s.

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
I understand him. I'm not moving up without at least 100 buy-ins. Oh, ok, you can do that on lower buy-ins. I guess $500 is ok for 11s.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think i could 1 table the 11s on 99 bucks starting with less than a 20% ror. maybe even better than that. holla

[Slim Pickens]

You can integrate over all winners to find the average winning value and over all losers to find the average losing value. 20% and 20% probably isn't right but I'm just saying that when you pick numbers and do the math, more people are losing because of the rake than you might initially think.

SlimP

[drapes]

I lose money. For instance, I am currently down 8$. I was down 50$ until I plugged my leaks. And reloaded my bankroll.