Harrington, Helmuth, Brunson ect... V.S. New / Low level Players

[vai777]

Curious to know what everyone thinks a Pros Wining percentage would be at a 10 handed single table satelite. Played 10 times versus various groups of New / Low level Players.

Ie.. Hansen at a 10 handed table with 9 newbies what are his winning percentages over 10 tournaments (single table).

Just something to ponder.....

[Master5hake]

I've thought some about this too - spurred on by that one scene in Tilt where the Matador is playing online poker just for shits at a low limit -

For SNGs, I think 10 games is way too small a sample to actually ponder though - i think 200 would be an interesting start - and actually, I think could make a fairly interesting 'poker' show, where they would sit at a lot of these games and see how they fare - at the end there could be a 'revealing' to these other players as to who they just played

[bobdibble]

The pros would have a huge edge.

I'm a mid-limit limit player (15/30 to 30/60 depending on game selection) and have decided to learn NL. I'm starting at .01/.02 NL just to get a feel for the game, i.e. tune my reads of players to figure out how much to bet/raise for value and the min required to bluff with, etc. I'm going to move up in stakes about every 5-10K hands, or until I feel that I need to slow down because my edge is decreasing.

I am currently dominating the .01/.02 NL game, especially when the table goes HU or very short handed. My hand reading skills are far suppierior to the .01/.02 opponents, my stealing/defense skills are better, and my knowlege of odds is better (both for when I am drawing and for when I need to deny them odds on their draws.) --- and yes, since this is .01/.02, I know it isn't saying much. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

However, I suspect the degree of edge that I have in that game is similar to what a pro would have over more skilled amatures at higher stakes.

[vai777]

I was refering to a No-limit tourney not limit, I dont know if this would be a huge difference or not, but I would assume so.

[Niediam]

The highest ROI possible should be around the mid 40s with top 3 finishes being around 50% I believe. If you post this question is the 1-table Tournaments forum they will be able to give you much better answers.

[vai777]

What is ROI

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
I was refering to a No-limit tourney not limit, I dont know if this would be a huge difference or not, but I would assume so.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that their edge in either NL ring or NL tourney would be the same as the edge I am experiencing in .01/.02 NL ring... which is huge.

The only way their edge wouldn't be huge is if the blinds went up ultra fast and it became a push-fest/crap-shoot.

[Niediam]

From the 1-table Tournaments forum FAQ:

ROI: Return on Investment – the average return a player earns on an investment of $1. (Total Prizes Won-Total Buyins paid)/(Total Buyins) Note: Total buyins includes the rake paid to the card room.

[vai777]

Also this would be a live situation not ONLINE.

Any top Pro vs Amatuer / low level players.

Im just looking for an approximate percentage of winning a 10 handed no limit table played 10 times vs amatuers.

thats 90 different amatuers no one sees the pro play before they sit down at the table, and dont even know who he is. To avoid the ( hey I busted Doyle at so and so...) I would assume players would be even looser than normal with a chance to brag about busting out a star.

[Perseus]

I watched Harrington play in some 1000 SnG's while at the WSOP this year.

Throughout the time I saw other pro's, even if not so famous, play in these satelites. I would say the average table would have 2-3 pros, 3-4 decent players, and a couple of rich donks.

The pros did very well.

Sam Grizzle played in these constantly and I saw him win a lot. I also saw James Woods play in a few, I played with him in a 500, and he is a very good player and won his fair share (I know he is an actor and not pro, but he is very well respected in the poker circle as a very good player). The pros have a huge advantage in these things over new-decent players.