Who is really loosing at poker?!

[easypete]

[ QUOTE ]
1) WHY are people here losing players?

[/ QUOTE ]

30k+ posters on 2+2 (registered)... only about 200-300 regular (decent) posters on the strategy forums.

[ QUOTE ]
2) How is it that participating at 2+2 is not making them winners (related to #1).

[/ QUOTE ]

OOT and the zoo. Not really participating.

[ QUOTE ]
3) Who are these guys? (Obviously not asking for examples, but maybe a profile.)

[/ QUOTE ]

All those that don't participate in strategy based forums. All those that see things as "black and white", and can't change up their game when things change (levels, tables, players, etc).
All those that use the forums as their sole source of information and don't put in the time for reading books, or put in enough playing time between posts.
Again... 30k+ posters... It's not a far stretch to conceive that 1/2 of them are losing players.

I know that I've made a bunch of money playing hold'em. I feel that these forums were very vital to my success (at least sped up the process). I've played over 150k hands starting at .5/1 and now playing 5/10 and 10/20 6-max. And I will say one thing... Even tho pokertracker tells me that I'm a winning player, I always feel that one bad swing can change all that. Maybe I've just been lucky, so far... I dunno.

When Sexton says "Takes 5 minutes to learn and a lifetime to master"... I think he's right. Everytime I change levels, I get reminded of just how much I have to learn.

[DMBFan23]

this is a fantastic post. outstanding. I think most of the people (myself included) who question the 50% assumption frequent the strategy forums. it's hard to imagine that even 15% of the posters who read/contribute there regularly could be losing players.

[AncientPC]

[ QUOTE ]
this is a fantastic post. outstanding. I think most of the people (myself included) who question the 50% assumption frequent the strategy forums. it's hard to imagine that even 15% of the posters who read/contribute there regularly could be losing players.

[/ QUOTE ]

A lot of times people are just reiterating something someone else said for a hand rather than shed new light.

Also, it's a lot different when you read a hand, think for 5 minutes, put villain on a range of hands, and then decide what's the best +EV move.

Combine the fact that not everyone can play the hand correctly to begin with (without seeing someone else's post first), and then only give them 30 seconds to think about the hand (or less if multitabling).

Some people just don't "get it" and can never play poker well. Sure they learn to tighten up and play more aggressively, but they have some flaw in their game that limits them from moving up.

Wasn't the stat that only 10% or all poker players are long term winners? It may be a bit higher on these forums, but it's still a very small amount.

Just because 10% are winners doesn't mean 90% are losers. It could be 10% are winners, 40% are breakeven (w/o bonuses or rakeback), and 50% are losers.

If half of 2+2 are winners that approximates to 15k players. Assuming that a majority of them play on Party Poker and are multitabling, then we'd just be playing each other most of the time.

[ QUOTE ]
In a COMPLETELY unrelated point, anyone miss CinnamonWind/Matador?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all.

[MicroBob]

precisely.


Those who dispute the 50% figure seem to forget about the number of trolls and total morons who post here semi-regularly also.
That's a healthy 5-10% right there I think.


Not too long ago I would have considered myself the breaking-point for 2+2'ers....if you weren't as good as me then you probably weren't a winning player because I was REALLY mediocre.


Now I consider myself barely-above mediocre for the most part.
Most of the players who have decent games know they are decent.


But a lot of 2+2'ers are just weak-tight despite all the information on here telling them there are better ways to play.


Out of 30k posters on here in total...how many really read or post regularly?
In the strategy forums?


How many times does a newbie ask "What's pokertracker?" or "what does VPIP mean?" or "how do you know your opponents' stats?"


Those who are asking such basic questions probably represent dozens more who are lurking or only have a couple of posts.


There's no question that reading 2+2 as well as participating can make one a winning player.
But the fact remains that MANY registered users here just don't take advantage of the resources here.



It's probably not unlike the number of people who bought SSHE and think it's total garbage...as well as the number of people who have read Hellmuth's book who think it's gold.



Some people just can't tell the difference between the quality info from the total crap.

[Freakin]

I'd say that I'm weak tight right now.... i haven't been putting any time into my game lately, and it's showing... I definitely consider myself a "winning" player, but by no means am I a good player. Better than average, yes, but I'm guessing my true WR is 1BB/100, at best. And when I said "half this board," I certainly didn't mean half of the well-known, strategy posters. I meant half of the registered users who have logged on in teh last 30-60 days or so... I don't think anyone in the strat forums I respect and have taken advice from is a losing player, and most of the guys who post advice fall into that category. They comment on the less-obvious hands, and aren't afraid of being corrected; it is their desire to improve that makes this board great.


Freakin

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anyone in the strat forums I respect and have taken advice from is a losing player, and most of the guys who post advice fall into that category. They comment on the less-obvious hands, and aren't afraid of being corrected; it is their desire to improve that makes this board great.

[/ QUOTE ]


agreed.


For me I think there are two types of 2+2'ers.
The weak-tights who I really don't mind having at my table. But they ARE probably pulling in 1BB/100 or so.

And the really sharp, aggressive players who think at least 2 levels above me. I don't even want them observing my table becuase I'll be way too embarrassed for them to even see me play so badly.


There are SO many 2+2'ers who regularly post in the strategy forums who I have SO much respect for.
A lot of them probably are about equal to me in abilities....or maybe a bit better than me or maybe not quite as good as me.


I just was operating on the belief that there are a LOT of people who only frequent these forums not-so-regularly who just aren't very good.

[party36master]

[ QUOTE ]
For me I think there are two types of 2+2'ers.
The weak-tights who I really don't mind having at my table. But they ARE probably pulling in 1BB/100 or so.

And the really sharp, aggressive players who think at least 2 levels above me. I don't even want them observing my table becuase I'll be way too embarrassed for them to even see me play so badly.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look at just breakeven or winning players at 2+2, what percentage do you think have results of 1.5BB/100 or better? 2.00 BB/100 or better? 2.50 BB/100 or better? Lets assume we're at $3/$6. What are really good results? Trying to set reasonable goals.

[mmbt0ne]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
this is a fantastic post. outstanding. I think most of the people (myself included) who question the 50% assumption frequent the strategy forums. it's hard to imagine that even 15% of the posters who read/contribute there regularly could be losing players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it was Gamblor who said that if you surveyed everyone who posts at 2+2, that people who spend a majority of their time in OOT would have an average WR at least 1BB/100 lower than the others. He was probably being really generous with that assumption too.

I also think the fact that people know they can play break-even, or even slightly losing poker, but still make good money from rakeback causes a stunt in many players growth. Hey, I'm already making $x a month without beating the game, why should I try any harder to get better.

I don't know if I'm a winning or losing player. I'd certainly like to assume winning, but I definitely don't have a sample size to back that up. Right now, I'll just keep playing when I have time, and doing what I can to improve my game. If I end up being a losing player, with all of the resources I have here, I won't have anyone to blame but myself.

[bottomset]

ok if you include all 30k then ya its pretty high % of losers

but say a filter of everyone with 500+ posts in pokerstrat forums .. does anyone think the 50% still applies?

[MicroBob]

no.

But some of the advice offered in the strat forums is pretty bad sometimes (especially when I'm the one offering it up!!!)