Winrates at high stakes

[KidCleveland]

how often do these games run, NOT OFTEN! 500/1000 on Stars, NEVER!

[pjf1969]

Very true the 10 handed limit game is almost nonexistant above the 15/30 level, and seems unplayable unless you strive to be a robotic poker tracker clone. A year ago there was a lot of 10 handed on Party poker this traffic never made it to stars or FTP. The 6-max game must fiz next- Bill Chen talks about internet play vs. online play in the first section in The Mathematics of Poker. The win rate at high stakes poker probably -EV for 90% of the players in the game-just like every other level

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
The 6-max game must fiz next- Bill Chen talks about internet play vs. online play in the first section in The Mathematics of Poker.

[/ QUOTE ]


Very very interesting...

[ QUOTE ]
The win rate at high stakes poker probably -EV for 90% of the players in the game-just like every other level

[/ QUOTE ]

Only 90% eh?

[baronzeus]

I think 90% is about right

[Abbaddabba]

That doesnt make sense to me.

The reason that there's a higher proportion of losers to winners at smaller stakes is because of how significant the rake is.

What i find is that quite often the high stakes games online only form when a player who is significantly worse than all the others decides to sit. Those circumstances would lead to a greater proportion of winners than losers absent of rake (or with a negligable rake, as it is in the bigger games).

[pjf1969]

internet play vs. online...

sorry- live play vs online play

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
this is a very interesting topic. As mentioned above its also hard to game select at this level since there are so few games running at a time, its not like finding a good 3/6 game. 1 million is definitely attainable I would imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Attainable vs regularly done is the question. From what we read, a large number should be knocking down $1 million/yr. Is it happening?

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
Attainable vs regularly done is the question. From what we read, a large number should be knocking down $1 million/yr. Is it happening?

[/ QUOTE ]


Not all that do would admit and/or brag about it. Likely that is the wisest choice.

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]

What i find is that quite often the high stakes games online only form when a player who is significantly worse than all the others decides to sit. Those circumstances would lead to a greater proportion of winners than losers absent of rake (or with a negligable rake, as it is in the bigger games).

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems obviously true. BZ and others who think 90% of the high stakes player pool is -EV, do you guys think most of the pros who think they're +EV in the big games actually aren't? When I'm in a high stakes 6 max game I usually recognize 3-4 of the other players as guys who play every day for a living and are almost certainly winners. How do you figure these games are 90% losers?

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

What i find is that quite often the high stakes games online only form when a player who is significantly worse than all the others decides to sit. Those circumstances would lead to a greater proportion of winners than losers absent of rake (or with a negligable rake, as it is in the bigger games).

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems obviously true. BZ and others who think 90% of the high stakes player pool is -EV, do you guys think most of the pros who think they're +EV in the big games actually aren't? When I'm in a high stakes 6 max game I usually recognize 3-4 of the other players as guys who play every day for a living and are almost certainly winners. How do you figure these games are 90% losers?

[/ QUOTE ]


I think, they think, we bust the fish quickly at such stakes, so that at a quick glance, there is usually only one or two fishy fish around for each table full of pros, yet over the long term, we are crushing the hopes and dreams of many a piss poor poker player. /end runon