Poker Needs Better Stats

[psujohn 0]

I think I agree on the invitational wins not counting bit. Though I think I'd leave the WSOP TOC in. It's not really an invitational. Theoretically I could win the TOC. All you need to do is win an event to get in.The biggest problem for me is that none of the money winner lists include costs. I'm a lot less impressed by a guy who's made $2 million on the tourney circuit but has spent $3 million on buy-ins than by a guy who's won $1 million but spent $50K on buy-ins.Cash players track their wins by BB/100 or BB/hr. Tourney players online track ROI. Though it would be impossibly skewed to guys like Jerry Yang an ROI leader list would be most telling IMHO.

[pokerfriendly 0]

IMO it does'nt matter about the invitational aspect of the stats, i really don't think thats the point of the title. All time money leader as long is it's professionally organized, if not the list would be way to long. more then likely the players being offered invitationals are in the running or likely to move up the list!! Having said that, putting regulations or more stipulations on the tile would get cloudy and create grey areas . the title is just all time money winner in tournament play!! of coarse just my two cents !!

[aucu 3]

it would be impossible to work in costs, a point system would be good but never perfect.Restricted events def a no no

[Moneyball16 0]

I think I agree on the invitational wins not counting bit. Though I think I'd leave the WSOP TOC in. It's not really an invitational. Theoretically I could win the TOC. All you need to do is win an event to get in.The biggest problem for me is that none of the money winner lists include costs. I'm a lot less impressed by a guy who's made $2 million on the tourney circuit but has spent $3 million on buy-ins than by a guy who's won $1 million but spent $50K on buy-ins.Cash players track their wins by BB/100 or BB/hr. Tourney players online track ROI. Though it would be impossibly skewed to guys like Jerry Yang an ROI leader list would be most telling IMHO.

A agree 100% with this. It would be very interesting to see whether or not players like Phil Gordon and Tom McEvoy have been winners, how much have players like Clonie Gowen lost and it would also be fun to look at players like Hellmuth's ROI's in WPT event compared to WSOP events.

[Cash_Rules 0]

I think comparing WPT money leaders to WSOP money leaders is like apples and oranges. The reason is WSOP earnings include winnings from all the preliminary events, while the WPT earnings only includes the main events. For instance, the 5 Diamond World Poker Classic, which just recently finished, had 10 other events that should be included as WPT winnings.The ideal way to track tournament stats, would be for all casinos to share a central tournament database. It would include: Player Name, Buy-In, Amount Won, Profit, # of Players, Place Finished, Game Type (NLHE, PLO, etc), Event Type (WPT, WSOP, Invite, etc).Then queries could be run to give all sorts of tournament stats. The problem of course would be getting the historical data and getting all the different casinos to collaborate.

[uncooper 1]

Wouldn't it be cool if there were "box score" style records for every hand of WSOP/WPT/major tournaments?

[Cappy37 0]

Cash players track their wins by BB/100 or BB/hr. Tourney players online track ROI. Though it would be impossibly skewed to guys like Jerry Yang an ROI leader list would be most telling IMHO.

This could be easily done just like baseball determines batting leaders and e.r.a leaders: Minimum requirements.you need at least, say, 40 tourneys under your belt to "qualify" for the "ROI" or "Finished Late" type categories.

[grocery_mony 9]

Something like thepokerdb for live tournaments would be good. You see players online with 6 figures in tourney cashes but then you also see that they have spent more than they won. PSU makes a good point about the TOC. Chris Moneymakers $40 to $2.5 million plus a lifetime freeroll is gotta be up there on one of the best ROI's ever.

[DanielNegreanu 141]

You are wrong about the TOC. In the first year all 10 players were invited and Annie Duke won the 10 person sit n' go and became the all-time money leader at the time for women, despite the fact that no other woman had the opportunity to even play in the event. Since then, sponsor exemptions have been given to players every year, players like Hellmuth, Chan, Doyle, and Mike Sexton who ended up winning it one year. I'm actually organizing a really, really big tournament in February. It's a $100 million buy in heads up event between me and my mother. First prize is $100,000,000.01 and second will get $99,999,999.99. I will then be the all-time money winner in poker history, yeah!!!

[pokerfriendly 0]

You are wrong about the TOC. In the first year all 10 players were invited and Annie Duke won the 10 person sit n' go and became the all-time money leader at the time for women, despite the fact that no other woman had the opportunity to even play in the event. Since then, sponsor exemptions have been given to players every year, players like Hellmuth, Chan, Doyle, and Mike Sexton who ended up winning it one year. I'm actually organizing a really, really big tournament in February. It's a $100 million buy in heads up event between me and my mother. First prize is $100,000,000.01 and second will get $99,999,999.99. I will then be the all-time money winner in poker history, yeah!!!

Thats right you would be the all time winner of money in the ****en history of poker and thats what the title is meant for who won the most. but she might beat you and officially have won more money than you have!!!

[jeff_536 3]

Thats right you would be the all time winner of money in the ****en history of poker and thats what the title is meant for who won the most. but she might beat you and officially have won more money than you have!!!

I don't think the two-cent swing between first and second will let his mom catch up to his career earnings.

[Lynbrook 0]

You are wrong about the TOC. In the first year all 10 players were invited and Annie Duke won the 10 person sit n' go and became the all-time money leader at the time for women, despite the fact that no other woman had the opportunity to even play in the event. Since then, sponsor exemptions have been given to players every year, players like Hellmuth, Chan, Doyle, and Mike Sexton who ended up winning it one year. I'm actually organizing a really, really big tournament in February. It's a $100 million buy in heads up event between me and my mother. First prize is $100,000,000.01 and second will get $99,999,999.99. I will then be the all-time money winner in poker history, yeah!!!

I would consider you the all-time money winner if you really had that tournament. Of course that would mean that you would actually have 100,000,000.01 on you! What address will this game be taking place at?

[Lynbrook 0]

I don't think the two-cent swing between first and second will let his mom catch up to his career earnings.

Ouch!

[pokerfriendly 0]

I don't think the two-cent swing between first and second will let his mom catch up to his career earnings.

how can there there be two winners in a two man turney explain this. it would'nt be very ligitimite if there was.

[pokerfriendly 0]

Ouch!

please stop typing before i start being rude!!

[Lynbrook 0]

please stop typing before i start being rude!!

Oh loving thise internet toughies. Maybe with the two cents Daniel will win from his Mother, he can give you half so you can buy some sarcasm pills.Take it easy man, it's a fun internet forum. It's all good. Hope you have a good holliday.

[showstopper24 0]

You are wrong about the TOC. In the first year all 10 players were invited and Annie Duke won the 10 person sit n' go and became the all-time money leader at the time for women, despite the fact that no other woman had the opportunity to even play in the event. Since then, sponsor exemptions have been given to players every year, players like Hellmuth, Chan, Doyle, and Mike Sexton who ended up winning it one year. I'm actually organizing a really, really big tournament in February. It's a $100 million buy in heads up event between me and my mother. First prize is $100,000,000.01 and second will get $99,999,999.99. I will then be the all-time money winner in poker history, yeah!!!

Good luck with that tourny.

[psujohn 0]

You are wrong about the TOC. In the first year all 10 players were invited and Annie Duke won the 10 person sit n' go and became the all-time money leader at the time for women, despite the fact that no other woman had the opportunity to even play in the event. Since then, sponsor exemptions have been given to players every year, players like Hellmuth, Chan, Doyle, and Mike Sexton who ended up winning it one year.

Yes in years that it an invitational it shouldn't count. I don't think having sponsor exemptions makes a difference though. In my mind the even is open if I personally can win it. The only thing the prevented me from being able to win last year's TOC is the fact that I didn't play any WSOP events.Looking at it another way is the WSOP ME an invitational event because some players get a "free" (sponsored) entry and other have to pay their way in with their own money?I think the point about the WPT money list counting only the main events is an interesting one. I think that with an event like the 5 Diamonds only the main event is an actual WPT event. The others are simply tournaments that the casino happens to schedule in advance of the WPT event. Of course it wouldn't be fair to compare the WPT events to just the WSOP ME either since there are 8 or 10 or however many WPT events in a year as opposed to one WSOP ME.

[000Cedric000 0]

People have to realize that in poker an all-time money list doesn’t mean anything. Poker is not like tennis or golf. If you are number 10 on the all-time money list in golf, you are a great player. If you are in the top 10 on the all-time money list in tournament poker, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you are a great poker player. It doesn’t matter if you include or exclude invitational events, include or exclude WSOP events or whatever. An all-time money list will never tell you how good a poker player really is. Stats simply don’t work in poker as good as in sports.Point systems are better but still not perfect. It’s funny to see how different the point systems of Cardplayer and Bluff magazine are. When Chad Brown won the Bluff Player of the Year Award in 2006 he was 88th on the Cardplayer list. It’s very difficult to work out a fair and good point system, which takes account of the buy-in, the number of players that entered the tournament etc etc.

[Balloon guy 158]

I read somewhere that 62.5% of all stats were made up on the spot anyway.And Daniel, I will be happy to deal your tournament, for no pay...just tip me out of the prize pool.

[Zeatrix 0]

I read somewhere that 62.5% of all stats were made up on the spot anyway.And Daniel, I will be happy to deal your tournament, for no pay...just tip me out of the prize pool.

Nice to see you have a film with my spokesperson in your sig BG! Btw, you are a 100% wrong

[Balloon guy 158]

Nice to see you have a film with my spokesperson in your sig BG! Btw, you are a 83.7% wrong

fyp

[nutzbuster 7]

I read somewhere that 62.5% of all stats were made up on the spot anyway.And Daniel, I will be happy to deal your tournament, for no pay...just tip me out of the prize pool.

There is an eleventy.seventy % chance that you won't get a certain phone call.

[SpiderGuard 0]

I read somewhere that 62.5% of all stats were made up on the spot anyway.

Duh...82% of all people already knew that.

[Alina 0]

People have to realize that in poker an all-time money list doesn’t mean anything. Poker is not like tennis or golf. If you are number 10 on the all-time money list in golf, you are a great player. If you are in the top 10 on the all-time money list in tournament poker, that doesn’t necessarily mean that you are a great poker player. It doesn’t matter if you include or exclude invitational events, include or exclude WSOP events or whatever. An all-time money list will never tell you how good a poker player really is. Stats simply don’t work in poker as good as in sports.Point systems are better but still not perfect. It’s funny to see how different the point systems of Cardplayer and Bluff magazine are. When Chad Brown won the Bluff Player of the Year Award in 2006 he was 88th on the Cardplayer list. It’s very difficult to work out a fair and good point system, which takes account of the buy-in, the number of players that entered the tournament etc etc.

Best way to judge poker greatness is by one simple stat-how many bracelets you have.