blonde poker forum

Are winning online?

What % do you think are actually winning?

from what the say everyone, some of the biggest winners i know on party and stars have the worst swings in the world

I'd have thought that people who'd won that much money playing poker would be able to afford better swings for their garden.

And thank you Andrew T, our new Red-Dog!

Are you Bob Carolgies?

i'm not >:(
got a new strategy though ;D

I would guess 15-20%

I have an online bank roll that is as tight as a sieve. Yes I'm losing, but learning. I know where I am going wrong though so that's something.

I have to laugh tonight, played a couple of Party Sngs and cash, not happy at all, putting money when ahead and septics pushing their small/meduim pockets to the river, hitting and taking the money. Then played ladders on Ladbrokes, had the biggest compliment paid to me, by a departing plyaer, "f.u. pro, gl to the others" made my day, now I have a very minor inkling as to how the Rookie feels.

My dissertation was on the mini economy that is poker. I came up with 77% non-winners. I wont bore you with the econometrics behind it but I dont think it was too far off as I got a good mark! ;)

Hey look,  I AM normal!  ;D

long term i think 10-15% will be winners, its just so fast, money changes hands so fast

Due to the swings, short term this is probably about correct. Long term however I would have to think it is slightly higher.

In ring games think that the % will vary depending on the level - at the levels where the rake is biting most - average pot $60 or less - I would be surprised if 10% are winners.  At higher levels I would guess that it might be as much as 25%.  A lot of higher level games are funded by one or two big losers or players taking a shot at a level they are not bankrolled for and not playing well due to fear. 

If more than 10% of tournament players were winners I would be surprised.

Well, there ARE lies, damned lies and statistics, but....

I have a Poker Tracker (http://www.pokertracker.com/?AfID=22755) database with 4,140,999 hands of $3/6 LIMIT Hold Em on Party Poker.

From a total of 24,817 players recorded, 37.75 percent are winners, and 62.25 percent are losers.

The biggest winner is someone who is $1625 ahead after 13,093 hands.

The biggest loser is someone who is $1787 down after 6,146 hands.

Congrats to Div for the sneak spam!!

Although i thank you for the stats.

For those that didnt notice there is a hyperlink in the text to pokertracke equiped with an affiliate code.

sneaky

Can someone explain to me, in plain English, what this means?

To be frank Royal Flush, I don't see the problem.

If someone reads my (constructive, I think) post and doesn't have any interest in the application, they won't click the link. If they are interested, and do click the link, and decide to buy, I get a percentage of the price they pay. It doesn't cost them any more.

Of course, I didn't have to actually include a link to Poker Tracker, but if I didn't what are the odds someone comes along later on the thread and says 'Where do I find out more about Poker Tracker?' Cue another wasted post (much like this one), saying 'You can find out more about it at...'

However, since you are so touchy about this.....

IF anyone is intested in buying Poker Tracker and has a great objection to people making money from affiliate fees, you can click here (http://www.pokertracker.com) to find out about Poker Tracker without running the risk of helping a fellow player out, if you don't mind people using affiliate links, you can click here (http://www.pokertracker.com/?AfID=22755).

I bought Poker Tracker a while ago, before they introduced an affiliate scheme, and it disappointed me that there wasn't one in place to help me reward the guy who recommended the software to me via his website (http://cardsspeak.servebeer.com).

Personally whenever I need to buy something online, I try to buy it through an affiliate link, since I'd rather see a small cut of the fee go to someone other than 'the man'.

Similarly when I sign up to a new poker site I always do it through an affiliate link from a site I like, for the same reason. Part of my rake goes to someone I like, and not to a faceless billionaire.

Its when you put a link to a website in the text, as he has done with the word 'poker tracker' also if you hold your mouse over the word u will see at the bottom of your browser what the link is, in this case its pokertracker.com/afilxxxx in other words an affiliate code.


Div, i didnt say there was anything wrong with it, its just common practice to ask Tikay before you put up an affiliate link.

Really don't think he meant any harm, I certainly didn't

Just pulling your leg, sorry

neither do i, i just remember the way the hendon mob forum went. Everey day you would get multiple posts with affil links stuck in the text, i just dont want to see this place go the same way.

Not saying thats why Div is doing, infact i believe he is trying to help. And i also rate poker tracker.

I meant you, lol

I've already PMed Tikay and apologised for any offence caused, so let's have a virtual handshake and move on!

Just to get back to the original question, with the info to hand, it's possible to pick your table very carefully at the big sites i.e. Party Poker, PokerStars, etc.

We know from the info I've got that at $3/6 limit, roughly one third of players win, and two thirds lose. So, if you are settling down to start a new session, and can see table 1 has 60% winners, 40% losers, and table 2 has 10% winners, 90% losers, which waiting list are you going to join!

You can use a FREE (so no affiliate fees  ;) plug-in called PokerAceHUD or Gametime+  to overlay the screen with the stats, so there's not even the hassle of having to root around the database. Example below:

(http://www.div1970.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/gametime.jpg)

wow i not seen that plugin before!!

Does poker tracker still only work for holdem?

There's a version for Omaha now.

That is an old screenshot I showed to my mates using Gametime+

I'd actually recommend PokerAceHUD now. Check this out:

(http://www.div1970.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/images/pokeracehud.jpg)

This is a screen grab from a session on Empire Poker that I was tracking using Poker Tracker and a tool called Poker Ace HUD.

The stats for each player show things like percentage of hands they play, how often they raise.

The interesting this is that you can see three sets of cards. At showdown the two guys with aces auto-mucked, as they lost to a straight which the guy with 8s9s hit.

But the hand history is written to a file which this software reads. It sees the mucked cards and flashes them up on screen for a few seconds. So you can instantly see what the other guys were playing! INFORMATION!!

I would love to use some of these devices, but the simplest technology baffles me

The first time I used an egg timer, I put it in with the eggs

Although the total number of hands is impressive, I'm not really sure that it is statistically significant.  I think that Sklansky or Malmuth said that 300 bb loss or win was a key figure in determining whether it was likely that you were a loser or winner in a game - your most extreme figures are within this (just...).  

If you can be bothered doing a bit more work why don't you look at the results of players who have 10k 15k and 20k hands in your database.  It would be interesting to see if the divergence between % of winners and losers increases with hands played or stays constant.

oops just thought of a problem - far less losers than winners will reach the 10k, 15k 20k hand levels - so pointless to analyse

That sounds WAY to much like hard work. I work with software all day, so at night I tend to stick to poker sites.

Anyway I thought the 300BB figure was recommended bankroll i.e. to variance proof yourself at $3/6 your bankroll should be at least $1800?


One very interesting thing that leaps out from the top twelve players in terms of hands played is that their playing style is VERY similar.

They ALL voluntarily put money in 13% of the time, they ALL raise pre-flop 9% of the time, and they ALL win at showdown about 55% of the time.

Nine are clear winners, two are even, and one is down $200. I reckon that tends to imply there's a certain style which is pretty much guaranteed to win at these tables in the long run. The one loser and two break even can be attributed to variance.

If I see any of them at a table, I'll steer well clear!

Red you don't need the help. I've seen you at those final tables recently!

Still can't believe that J3 suckout - and the guy went on to win the tourney!

Very interesting stuff, will need to think about it, may be to much, after all its just people, chips , and cards ??? >:D >:D

Getting back to Flushy's question, followed by my enquiry, let's just put this little fire out.

Div is a "solid" & respected blondeite, been around here a goodly while, makes insightful posts, & so far as I can see, does not generally use the blonde Forum for personal financial gain.

It's very tough to draw the line between right & wrong in terms of spam, especially to someone like me with no experience of these things, but I think Div has made a valid post, told us stuff that was useful, & the vast majority of his posts are "normal stuff". And, it's fair to say that blonde looks favourably on "helping our own". He has written to me offering to apologise if wrong - but I don't think he needs to.

As a general rule, it's wise to check in advance if in doubt.

Flushy's point about blonde going down the HM route is also valid - VERY valid, and I promise, we ain't going down that road. Ever.

It's good that you guys care, too.

If I remember, the reason for the 300bb bankroll was something like - if that if you beat the game by 1bb an hour, there is only a 1% chance of going broke.  So if you do go broke, there is a 99% probability that you aren't beating the game for 1bb an hour.   If you can find it easily. I would be interested in how many players are actually winning 1bb or more per 50 hands.

I was having this conversation the other day with a bloke down the pub who was involved in the party gaming flotation. He said 15% but trusting my memory is not exactly an exact science

I *think* I can get that info, but it will probably take til tomorrow. Very big database, running on very old PC (Fedora Linux and PostgreSQL for any techie geeks out there!), so could take a while to execute the query.

"execute the query"........

I'm not that way inclined myself, but that's a bit extreme in this permissive age, don't you think?

Done by leathal injection, (just a little prick)

This post will self delete in 60 seconds

Another ruined keyboard, & I gotta go make a fresh cuppa.

It ran quicker than expected (or am I just up later than expected) and tell me that 6% of active players - with a minimum of 100 hands played - are winning greater than 1BB per 50 hands.

Still quite a small sample size to go much deeper into the data.

Well said I need a translation too!

Just play with it, its much easier to use than it looks.

Thats what my girl said about the rabbit :D

LMAO

me too i got poker tracker and aint got a clue how to use it.

Me too.  :D

Thanks Div - that's much more interesting than the losers/winners - only 6% of players significantly beating the game!!

If you go to this site (http://cardsspeak.servebeer.com), there's a banner advert at the top of the page for an e-book which the guy co-authored.

It's a good guide to setting up and using Poker Tracker and it's pretty cheap.

Fecking brilliant a classic Red Dog moment I was just reading through that thread and this was clearly the best bit!!  :D

i was talking to some one yesterday (keeping his name to myself)

i have known this man for a few years now .

hes one of the biggest online players now .

started with an outlay off $300 only

he was telling me he won 240k sunday night

has a online account off 1.2mill

You've only met me twice.

I wouldn't say we go back that far mate! ;)

did i see you yesterday ,i did idnt i

Nah mate fraid not. Check your PMs.