|
|
#31
07-20-2005, 09:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
This 10% number is made up to make the people that loose feel better about themselves and to make the winners feel superior. It is more than 10%. If you play at a table with 1 bad person the bad person takes care of the rake. That leaves the rest of the players to fight for the rest. And it is pretty rare to play at a table with only 1 bad person. Mt guess would be 75% lose and 25% win. It is my experience that there are not a lot of break even players. You either get it or you dont. I am not that great at poker and I find winning fairly easy... so stop with the 10%. [/ QUOTE ] Let's see - on one hand we have actual statistics coming directly from the site, 8% and 7% winners. On the other hand we have your made-up numbers and guesses. Which one is more valid? I'll have to get back to you on that... 
|
|
#33
07-20-2005, 09:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
Let me put it to you like this.
You are sitting at a 10 person table with 1 really bad player. This is fairly rare because usually there is more than 1 bad player but in this case lets say 1. The rake is at most 10%. On most sites it is half that or less but lets say 10%. One bad player who is gonna end up losing their money = 10% of the money going in on the table. Actually because they are bad they will put in more than their share but for arguments sake say exactly 10%. So we have a 10% rake with a player at the table who will end up losing their money. They are putting in 10% of the money at the table. How can you say one bad player at the table does not pay for the rake? The reality is that the rake is gonna be 5% not 10%. And there will be at leat 2 bad players at the table that are destined to loose their money. How is it that only 1 of the people that are left are going to be able to make money? Please, dont talk about bell curves and such, answer my question. The 10% is a myth that is created to make people that win feel like they are superior to 90% and people that lose feel like hey at least no one wins.
|
|
#34
07-20-2005, 09:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This 10% number is made up to make the people that loose feel better about themselves and to make the winners feel superior. It is more than 10%. If you play at a table with 1 bad person the bad person takes care of the rake. That leaves the rest of the players to fight for the rest. And it is pretty rare to play at a table with only 1 bad person. Mt guess would be 75% lose and 25% win. It is my experience that there are not a lot of break even players. You either get it or you dont. I am not that great at poker and I find winning fairly easy... so stop with the 10%. [/ QUOTE ] Let's see - on one hand we have actual statistics coming directly from the site, 8% and 7% winners. On the other hand we have your made-up numbers and guesses. Which one is more valid? I'll have to get back to you on that... [/ QUOTE ] Answer my question above please.
|
|
#35
07-20-2005, 09:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
The bad player is "destined" to lose his money but he is not paying the rake out of his stack. The total amount of rake paid by the table can be more than the 1 bad player's buyin by the time his roller-coaster finishes at the bottom. Putting rake in terms of buyins and saying one bad player pays everyone's rake is dumb.
|
|
#36
07-20-2005, 09:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
Let me put it to you like this. You are sitting at a 10 person table with 1 really bad player. This is fairly rare because usually there is more than 1 bad player but in this case lets say 1. The rake is at most 10%. On most sites it is half that or less but lets say 10%. One bad player who is gonna end up losing their money = 10% of the money going in on the table. Actually because they are bad they will put in more than their share but for arguments sake say exactly 10%. So we have a 10% rake with a player at the table who will end up losing their money. They are putting in 10% of the money at the table. How can you say one bad player at the table does not pay for the rake? The reality is that the rake is gonna be 5% not 10%. And there will be at leat 2 bad players at the table that are destined to loose their money. How is it that only 1 of the people that are left are going to be able to make money? Please, dont talk about bell curves and such, answer my question. The 10% is a myth that is created to make people that win feel like they are superior to 90% and people that lose feel like hey at least no one wins. [/ QUOTE ] I would suggest that most people don't play just one poker table in their careers. Say three people end up positive for the session on this table. That doesn't say anything about how they will end up cummulatively 30 sessions down the road. edit: In fact I would suggest to you that it is entirely possible for all ten players at a table to be net losers over time. Most of the players are trading money back and forth around the the table (and by table I mean the big continuous table of many sessions) they're up some, they're down some days, but over time the trend is down. On any given day there may be several winners on a table. Many of those winners will be donators on other occaissions. For the sake of argument lets assume the same ten people always play together. Can just one of them be a long term winner? Sure. The other nine trade money back and forth over many sessions and slowly bleed off to the rake and the one winning player. What's so hard to see about that? --Zetack
|
|
#37
07-20-2005, 09:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
Let me put it to you like this. You are sitting at a 10 person table with 1 really bad player. This is fairly rare because usually there is more than 1 bad player but in this case lets say 1. The rake is at most 10%. On most sites it is half that or less but lets say 10%. One bad player who is gonna end up losing their money = 10% of the money going in on the table. Actually because they are bad they will put in more than their share but for arguments sake say exactly 10%. So we have a 10% rake with a player at the table who will end up losing their money. They are putting in 10% of the money at the table. How can you say one bad player at the table does not pay for the rake? The reality is that the rake is gonna be 5% not 10%. And there will be at leat 2 bad players at the table that are destined to loose their money. How is it that only 1 of the people that are left are going to be able to make money? Please, dont talk about bell curves and such, answer my question. The 10% is a myth that is created to make people that win feel like they are superior to 90% and people that lose feel like hey at least no one wins. [/ QUOTE ] You're tossing around percentages like they are all equal, but they're not. I don't think this can be discussed as percentages, but as rates. If the average pot at a .5/1 table is $7, and the rake is 10% (your numbers, just to keep it easy), then the BB/100 of the rake is 70/100 (Average pot is $7 = 7BB, 10% of 7BB is .70BB, times 100 hands) for the WHOLE table. So your one bad player has to lose at a rate of 70BB per 100 hands to be the 'one paying the rake'. If he loses less than that, then he is not simply paying the rake. KO
|
|
#38
07-20-2005, 09:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
So we have a 10% rake with a player at the table who will end up losing their money. They are putting in 10% of the money at the table. How can you say one bad player at the table does not pay for the rake? [/ QUOTE ] The rake is not 10% of everyone's buyin, it's 10% (x%) of every pot. If the table plays one hand it's almost nothing in terms of buyins; if the table continues indefinitely without new money entering the game, the rake is almost all the "money coming into the table." Not 10%.
|
|
#39
07-20-2005, 09:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
The bad player is "destined" to lose his money but he is not paying the rake out of his stack. The total amount of rake paid by the table can be more than the 1 bad player's buyin by the time his roller-coaster finishes at the bottom. Putting rake in terms of buyins and saying one bad player pays everyone's rake is dumb. [/ QUOTE ] The bad player that will lose their stack is giving away to the table an amount that is equal to the rake. This in effect nullifies the cost of the rake even if the person is not putting it directly into the rake collection. This is why I dont post on this site very often.. too many people that cant use common sense and try and make up for it with secret reports and such. I am not saying tons of people make money. Just that is it more than 10%
|
|
#40
07-20-2005, 09:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% of poker players are winners???
[ QUOTE ]
The bad player that will lose their stack is giving away to the table an amount that is equal to the rake. [/ QUOTE ] These amounts are NOT equal. This is based solely on common sense and I did not read the "secret report." Edit: The total juice = 1 buyin in a Sit and Go, are you talking about those? Everyone else is talking about ring games.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
