What percent of onliner poker players are profitable?

[Spartan1983]

How do you check this in PT? Thanks,

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you check this in PT? Thanks,

[/ QUOTE ]

Summary Tab

[Voltron87]

People are looking at their pokertracker summaries and think that 40% of players are winners?

"LOL"

[celiboy]

This discussion has come up a billion times here and I don't think we will ever know the true %, but 5-10 seems reasonable in the long run.

Now....would the average bb/100 winrate in PokerTracker be indicative of the avearge players winrate? In the summary tab I'm showing -2.59/100 as the average.

If we assume that 10% are winning players, I think we can safely say that at best 50% of 2+2ers are winners at their respective limits. How can we assume that a large % of this 10% resides at 2+2? I see 3 or 4 new "running bad" posts on this site and you have to wonder how much of that is simply bad play.

[MyMindIsGoing]

[ QUOTE ]
Now....would the average bb/100 winrate in PokerTracker be indicative of the avearge players winrate? In the summary tab I'm showing -2.59/100 as the average.

[/ QUOTE ]

If average winrate is -2.9/100 it means that the average rake is 2.9 big bets per 100 hands. Winrate (excluding bonuses, rake, rake back and so on) is 0.0/100 on average.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
People are looking at their pokertracker summaries and think that 40% of players are winners?

"LOL"

[/ QUOTE ]

You neglect to consider that some people who are datamining have stats on millions of hands per month [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[swiftrhett]

It is also interesting to point out that while Party Poker took in ~$400M in revanue (rake) last year, they report that they paid out a total sum of ~$38M to their winning players.

The fact is that if someone tells you they win at poker, they are probably wrong. I love it when I meet someone who's really excited about poker that plays 4 hours live every weekend, and he confidently tells me that he makes 1 BB / hour. Unless he's been playing every weekend for 30 years, there is no way he can have any idea what his hourly rate is.

[excession]

a different but related query is 'how many folks sitting at my table are long-term winning players'at this skill level?

at $25NL presumably very few (as they would have moved up)
by the time they were long-term winners

but it's quite possible that someone just moving up to say $200 NL is a solid winning player at $100 but a loser at $200 - he may have earned $10,000's playing poker but still be a fish for the purposes of the table he's sat at..

also as the better players often play more tables and for longer you are more likely to come across them statistically than a loser

[chisness]

the problem with the 7% figure is that it probably takes into account people who deposit $50, lose it, then quit. of players who play frequently, a much higher percentage must be winners.

[Equal]

[ QUOTE ]
the problem with the 7% figure is that it probably takes into account people who deposit $50, lose it, then quit. of players who play frequently, a much higher percentage must be winners.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. How do you define a "loser" at poker? What about the guys that win $2.50 in a 3,000 player freeroll, then bust out at the penny tables? Does that count as one "loser"? How about my buddy that has probably two dozen accounts at the various online sites, that he used to bonus whore - but since he only regularly plays on one or two accounts, does he then count as 2 "winners" and 22 "losers"?

What about the guy that gets $50 free, runs it up to $200, and then cashes out to never play again? Is he a "winner"?