How many online pros average +500k a year in the world?

[jstill]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can even be a good 2/4nl pro and make $500k a year if you play a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is true, but people are either lazy or they keep moving up until they find a limit they can't beat. the number *could* easily be 500+, but it isn't, for aforementioned reasons.

[/ QUOTE ]

No doubt. The truth is most poker pros are idiots. Everyone is always trying to play higher and higher. Then when they get there they always want to piuck on the players who are good regulars instead of focusing on the few fish. Everyone has a rediculusly big ego. If people just grinded and game selected..etc. and stopped being so lazy a lot of people would make a lot of money at this game.

[/ QUOTE ]

some of u guys are kinda being ridiculous about this, leatherass I think ur drastically overestimating not only the ease of making this much but the number of players who do it.

Ive heard people drop numbers like 1.5bb/100 in limit at 30/60 and 5ptbb/100 playing a ton of hands at 5/T NL, but playing that many hands probably means u arent just playing when on ur A game or table selecting as much as you could all while massively multi tabling all of which hurt ur winrate.

On top of that these winrates are only achieved in the long long term (500k + hands) by the best in the game at these respected levels. At 5/T regulars who make this much per 100 while playing 6 tables or more are extrememly extremely rare, in limit to achieve a winrate over 1bb/100 at the mid to high stakes in the long long run is even more rare let alone hoping to make 2bb/100 at 20/40+ which isnt that realistic in todays games.

To put it in perspective, good2cu posted his year graph recently and it was less than 200K and hes been considered one of the better online NL grinders at 5/T and sometimes higher for awhile now and gehrig arguably the best limit HU specialist out there made 200k last year (and his edge is pretty large, his winrate HU is probably higher in sustainable terms than most six max or full ring players). Sure they may not have played nearly as much as some of u guys have outlined, but most people don't and really who wants to, thats part of the perk of the job is enjoying life, otherwise playing constantly engulfs and can get kind of miserable.

yeah there are a lot of people u could come up with who made more than 500k last year or will make it this year BUT I think most of u guys think its far more because literally almost all of them post on this forum so you hear about it from so many sources.

Making more than 100k is pretty decent, mroe than 200k means ur pretty much kickass, 500k+ from online poker and ur in a rarified atmosphere with not as much company as u may think

[bustedromo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You should take a look at some simulation graphs posted over in the MTT forum. There is very significant long-term variance swings even for high-volume online play. I was amazed when I saw those graphs. Unfortunately, can't find link right now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty sure OP meant poker pros, not lottery players.

[/ QUOTE ]

The graphs weren't for MTT players specifically. The graphs were for indepedent trials with a specified edge, bet size, and bankroll. Nothing to do with the specific game being played. Could be chess, backgammon, blackjack, whatever.

I really wish I could find the link to those graphs. Eye opening stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]


If you think that the variance is the same for MTT's as it is for cash-games then you are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said anything about MTT other than that the simulations were posted in the MTT forum. The purpose of the simulations wasn't to establish what kind of long-term trends might occur in a MTT pros bankroll. The purpose was to show how downswings and upswings can last for a very long time and become quite extreme even for standard conservative assumptions about edge, variance, bankroll, and velocity.

[Squareview]

around 380

[MyPetTurtle]

lol "average" poker earnings

[miikka84]

i think there is about 20 finish players who make over 500k in a year, and there is only 5 million people in finland, so i think that your estimations are way too low.

[Kevin Browne]

4-500

[bustedromo]

[ QUOTE ]
Making more than 100k is pretty decent, mroe than 200k means ur pretty much kickass, 500k+ from online poker and ur in a rarified atmosphere with not as much company as u may think

[/ QUOTE ]

In the MTT Community forum, Rizen sort of admitted his grind rate was perhaps a bit north of 200 $/hr. He plays a mix of MTT and cash and does not like to play excessive hours. So, even if we figure him on a 40 hr workweek and 2 wks vacation per year, that's 2000 * 200-250 $/hr = $400-500K / yr

However, Rizen plays some live MTT as well so there's travel time and tourney time and other grind downtime due to that, plus he's a devoted family man. I doubt he puts in 2000 grind hours per year. I'd say more like 1500, so that's $300-375K / yr

Of course, he's got other income coming in (PxF, speaking, etc.) plus if he hits it in a huge tourney, but that's another story.

[Taylor Caby]

i'm not sure what you mean by average. if you mean over the past few years, how many players have made roughly 500k+ each year, i would guess it is something like a few hundreds. There are likely less than ten tourney players who have made 500k+ the last 2-3 years online, 50-100 NL players, and maybe 25-50 limit/HORSE players.

The more I think about it, I'd probably bet the under on 200 as long as we are talking about a span of a couple of years. There are a lot of people who have made 500k+ in one year, it's just hard to do it for 2-3+ years.

tc

[Sciolist]

[ QUOTE ]
In the MTT Community forum, Rizen sort of admitted his grind rate was perhaps a bit north of 200 $/hr. He plays a mix of MTT and cash and does not like to play excessive hours. So, even if we figure him on a 40 hr workweek and 2 wks vacation per year, that's 2000 * 200-250 $/hr = $400-500K / yr

[/ QUOTE ]
Your post is quite sensible until the last part. He says he doesn't like to play excessive hours, which you equate to being 40 hours per week. I'm afraid that what he means is that he plays ~10-20 hours per week. I know a lot of big winners who do not put in more than 30k hands/month, or less.

[Zetack]

I don't the answer, and I suspect nobody else has a real good idea either.

However, I would note that if you assumed that there were a hundred players making at least $500,000 a year (and thus that at the top of the bell curve there were players making a lot more) you have to assume those top hundred players, collectively, are taking home a somewhere in the vicinity of 80 to a hundred million dollars a year. Possibly more, depending on how well and how big the top of the bell curve is and how much those top top players are making.

Intuitively, I think that's probably not happening.

I would also note, in response to a post in this thread, that the pool of players logging a million plus hands a year has to be pretty tiny (and the pool of repeaters who do more than a million hands a year more than once is gotta be even smaller).

Finally, the folks who put together hypothetical winrates times hypothetical numbers of hands, and conclude that its easy for large numbers of people to make huge bank, just aren't factoring in real world considerations.

--Zetack