How Many people can beat 5/10+ Online?(LC)

[ahnuld]

wow, eat my ass jedipoker trix. [censored] berated me on FTP, now I see how ridicuous his [censored] talking was.

And some people dont move up for random reasons. FSUplayer doesnt play higher than 25/50 despite being one of the best players in the world.

[bigt439]

the replies in this thread managed to be stupider than i expected them to be... and i expected them to be really dumb.

[DJ Sensei]

the funniest thing about that data is younghov consistently losing over a huge sample size.

also i've thought about it, and I think the answer to the original question is probably <1000 can, and <400 or so do.

[Erikson]

most of these guys with ~200k hands are capable of beating a game for more than 4ptb/100, yet they suffer from a lack of skill. This skill is called table selection. when practised consequently, I'd say good tableselection is probably the most +EV skill a standard 5/10 player can use. That said, a good table selector will frequently play like 2 tables on fulltilt, one on stars, three on partypoker, one on UB....

[RoundTower]

wow I just started trying to get good at NL and I assumed I would be beating 5/10 within 4-5 months, maybe I should give up.

[SEABEAST]

i think it would have to be 1000ish, definitely more than 500 and probably less than 2000. you have to take into account people that you don't see all the time that are still capable of winning at this level, like really intelligent students that focus more on school but have a very strong poker game when they do play, europeans who only play on their own sites but are very tough, HSNL players who don't play that much but would still kill 5/10, etc.

it's quite interesting i think. i did have a similar realisation to what ahnuld was talking about earlier in the thread when i was looking at FT games recently, that there was a chance that there might only be 1000 or so players better than me, and that as strange as that thought is to have - and as normal as it feels to succeed in the company of other 2+2 regular posters, the number of people pulling a lot out of the games probably really is that small.

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
when did this data start from?

and out of curiosity, do acceptable winrates go below 1 ptbb/100 for nosebleed stakes?

[/ QUOTE ]
ae jones is right, winrates don't exist for nosebleeds. just not enough hands. however, the winners win a ton more then 1ptbb/100. a ton. the player pool for 5/10 in that datamine is what, nearly 30k players? For nosebleed it would be like 300, tops. (including every fish, shot taker, drunk, name change, etc.)

[timex]

[ QUOTE ]
when did this data start from?

and out of curiosity, do acceptable winrates go below 1 ptbb/100 for nosebleed stakes?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say winrates at nosebleed stakes are probably fairly reasonable because games only run when theres some guy who couldn't beat like $2/$4 NL playing.

For people that just sit HU and 3 handed with anyone, probably (-2)-2PTBB/100 is almost always the case, but when the games fill up, they seem to usually be softer than your average 25/50 game, and since its the best players in the world playing, their winrates are probably reasonable high.

[Python49]

Didn't aba post an 8ptbb/100 win rate at nosebleeds for like a 50k hand sample size? His win rate exists.

[Sponger.]

[ QUOTE ]
And some people dont move up for random reasons. FSUplayer doesnt play higher than 25/50 despite being one of the best players in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike is one of the best players in the world? Good to know.

I think that for me, I can't be of the best players in the world, so I should try hard to be a better professional player, so that I can make the most money. Tilt control, game selection, bankroll management, its all something I can do to improve my $$/hr without even sitting at a poker table. So yeah, things like moving up are pretty important to me right now, and I don't think I could sit back and play 3/6 knowing that I could make so much more playing higher.