What percentage of players "consistently" win? - Page 2

#1 12-21-2005, 01:36 PM

You should take into account that it takes significantly less time for some to learn the same thing as others. Pure work will not make you good - you need talent - an ability to learn very quickly.

jtr · #2 12-21-2005, 05:04 PM

7 or 8%. Seriously.

ianlippert · #3 12-21-2005, 06:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
7 or 8%. Seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya a while back one of the major sites said that 8% of their players were in the black. That doesnt really mean anything since a player who wins $10 a month at the penny tables would be included. I think that the number of players that make $1000+/month is probably somewhere between 3-5%.

wadea · #4 12-21-2005, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think that the number of players that make $1000+/month is probably somewhere between 3-5%.

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess for this would be <1%. It would take a very good, logical, fact-supported argument to get me to believe >1% are making $1000+/mo.

#5 12-21-2005, 06:21 PM

About 7-8 percent sounds about right. Just thinking about it informally, if anyone is making a significant amount of money, then there must be a lot of people donating to the pot since I think most losing players don't lose very much (they simply quit playing or move to very low stakes). I do, however, think that 10% of those who try becoming winning players must be too low. It takes nothing more than a tiny amount of common sense and some patience to beat the micro limits. I can't imagine that anybody who wanted to be able to do this wouldn't be able to.

#6 12-21-2005, 09:11 PM

Hmm ... let us hope, that the remaining 92% do not realize this ... ?? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

(Damn 8% sounds low .. kind of scary, why then are all those people playing poker (at least ringgames, tourneys can fun, whether you win or not ... there is the lotto effect, hoping to get lucky one day and win BIG ... Ringgames on the other hand, they just suck you dry in no time, if you do not play well)

ianlippert · #7 12-23-2005, 08:38 AM

[ QUOTE ]
7 or 8%. Seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey jtr, wasnt it you that made a post in another of these threads that assumed 5-10% winners with certain winrates and SD, and then went on to show that at any given time you are going to get the 60/40 split in your PT database? I wonder if you knew were this post was because it really showed how few players are long term winners.

jtr · #8 12-24-2005, 11:04 AM

Hi, Ian.

Yes that was me. The previous thread can be found here. There's a long discussion of why the figure of around 40% winners (that so many people quote from their PT database) is likely to mislead. Some simple simulations show that everybody's PT numbers are perfectly compatible with the hypothesis that 8% or 10% of people have +EV.

Cheers,
--JTR.

#9 12-21-2005, 05:56 PM

Im sure I've seen this post at least twice before, maybe someone can dig a thread up. The usual conclusion is about 7-8% but usually suggestions range from 5-10%.

Hope that helps

UATrewqaz · #10 12-21-2005, 06:29 PM

Consistent is a sticky word when it comes to poker.

A great player, one who posts big $ wins every single month can easily have a period of days if not weeks of all losing sessions.

Variance is very extreme in hold em.

Over the "long haul" the general accepted number is 10% or so actually win money (this factors in the rake). Without the rake this % would be higher, I've heard about 25%.