Comparison of earn rates between ring games and MTTs

[mrxc]

I am new here and would like an opinion/answer from Mr. Sklansky or another well-respected poker figure. Please move this thread if it fits better elsewhere.

From what I read (your books and others'), the majority of players who are deemed "pros" play LHE followed by NLHE and lastly MTTs. Naturally, this would make one think that the best possible edges are in LHE (earn rate potential); however, it is common knowledge that these individuals who rely on income can not tolerate the variance of MTTs. This makes me inclined to believe that they are giving up an edge for more consistant results.

I am curious as to whom has the better earn rate and by how much: the top level CASH player or the top level MTT player (assuming equivalent entries). To compare the two, a common denominator would be needed such as "return on working capital". This could be measured as the percentage of profit/loss of a buyin used in a cash game or MTT over a common time period.

Best CASH player earns x% +/- variance over time period.
Best MTT player earns y% +/- variance over same time period.

So, extending the time period long enough that variance is reduced to an insignificant amount, how big is the difference and in who's favor?

Looking forward to your response.

MrXC

[mrxc]

I would like to add that this comparison is directed toward NL cash games vs NL MTTs