In the last week I've made 3 FTs and 3 other top 18 runs in fields of over 600 runners. However my highest place has been 5th.

Twice I've had above average stacks and once I was the CL.

I'm confident with STTs and short-handed play I think I may have just been running bad. It can be rather infuriating when we all know the proper money is in the top 3.

What sort proportion of FTs do the top online pros tend to win?

99% is unreal - dont know where you got it!! A lot depends on whole lot of other things like stack ratios etc when you get to the final table.. If a top pro enter FT as a chip leader then also, I'd think 90% will be more close to reality than 99%.

If you really stick by your word.. I am willing to bet you 1 to 99 odds against Phil Ivey making top 3 in Nov final table.. Wanna take it?

 

Originally Posted by jackofpoker

.

If you really stick by your word.. I am willing to bet you 1 to 99 odds against Phil Ivey making top 3 in Nov final table.. Wanna take it?

I would like to wager $5 on Ivey if you're seriously offering 99:1 on him finishing in the top 3.

ill take it $100

 

Originally Posted by dtools22

Before the thread gets hijacked, for me personally I think you should be making the final 3 at least 1/2 the time overall. If you are constantly shortstacked then I would suggest being more aggro with 15 or so left to build up a stack. If you come in with around an average chipstack I would think a good player should be able to make final 3 at least 1/2 the time.

<----- i think half the time is a bit ambitious.

I'm thinking we both knew what he meant, but thanks for being a smartass.

 

Originally Posted by Denty

"99 to 1" = 99:1
"1 to 99" = 1:99
so you can bet $5 to win 5/99 of a dollar

wat

 

Originally Posted by meaneye

<----- i think half the time is a bit ambitious.

Agreed. Applying that to everyone the math doesn't work. The problem with saying a "good player" should make top 3 half the time when they go to the final table with an average stack is that if true, it would imply the good player has quite a bit of skill edge over the rest of the final table. In larger fields (OP said fields were 600+) this is rarely going to be the case. There may be one or two donks who have luckboxed their way through the field, but most of the final table is going to be at least competent, and even a "good player" just does not have that big a skill edge over the field to consistently finish in the top 3 half the time when sitting on an average stack.

Months ago I thought about the same question OP has brought up. I ended up making a spreadsheet of various players' results, which included my own, some of my friends', and some random top ranked pros. These results included the # of FTs everyone made in total, the % of those FTs they finished top 3, the % they finished top 2, and the % they finished with a win (all according to results tracked by P5's, so these results don't include chops, tourneys not tracked by P5's, etc).

Variance clearly plays a big role in OP's question, and a sample of 3 FTs is basically irrelevant from a statistical standpoint. However, the players that I logged these stats on had/have particularly large samples, therefore making their results relatively legitimate.

Anyway, here's some of what I came up with ("Degen" = me or a friend of mine, "Top Pro" = self explanatory obv)...

<span> </span>

<span>Degen A:</span><span>
FTs � 32� Top 3 18 times (56%)� HU 16 times (50%)� Win 13%</span>

<span> </span>

<span>Degen B:</span>

<span>FTs � 71� Top 3 35 times (49%)� HU 23 times (32%)� Win 13%</span>

<span> </span>

<span>Degen C:</span>

<span>FTs � 39� Top 3 16 times (41%)� HU 12 times (31%)� Win 21%</span>

<span>
<span>FTs � 193� Top 3 85 times (44%)� HU 64 times (33%)� Wins 21%</span>

<span> </span>

<span>Top Pro C:</span>

<span>FTs � 222� Top 3 96 times (43%)� HU 65 times (30%)� Wins 21%</span>

 

Originally Posted by BillySunday

Top Pro C ???? Are you saying he/she is 51/51 HU? This must be a mistake.

mbn huh.

jackofpoker=tool

 

Originally Posted by shanetrain22

Months ago I thought about the same question OP has brought up. I ended up making a spreadsheet of various players' results, which included my own, some of my friends', and some random top ranked pros. These results included the # of FTs everyone made in total, the % of those FTs they finished top 3, the % they finished top 2, and the % they finished with a win (all according to results tracked by P5's, so these results don't include chops, tourneys not tracked by P5's, etc).

Variance clearly plays a big role in OP's question, and a sample of 3 FTs is basically irrelevant from a statistical standpoint. However, the players that I logged these stats on had/have particularly large samples, therefore making their results relatively legitimate.

Anyway, here's some of what I came up with ("Degen" = me or a friend of mine, "Top Pro" = self explanatory obv)...

<SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN>Degen A:</SPAN><SPAN>
FTs � 32� Top 3 18 times (56%)� HU 16 times (50%)� Win 13%</SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN>Degen B:</SPAN><SPAN>FTs � 71� Top 3 35 times (49%)� HU 23 times (32%)� Win 13%</SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN>Degen C:</SPAN><SPAN>FTs � 39� Top 3 16 times (41%)� HU 12 times (31%)� Win 21%</SPAN><SPAN>
<!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]--></SPAN><SPAN>Top Pro A:</SPAN><SPAN>
FTs � 99� Top 3 58 times (59%)� HU 36 times (36%)� Wins 24%</SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN>Top Pro B:</SPAN><SPAN>FTs � 193� Top 3 85 times (44%)� HU 64 times (33%)� Wins 21%</SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN>Top Pro C:</SPAN><SPAN>FTs � 222� Top 3 96 times (43%)� HU 65 times (30%)� Wins 21%</SPAN>

Awesome, just what I was looking for dude.

Cheers

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>A couple of years back, I looked at 6 players in the Top 10 and took their results from UB, stars and FTP then crunched the numbers;</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>These guys on average won 1% of the MTTs they entered</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They cashed between 14% and 17% of the time</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They reached a Final Table between 4% and 6% of the time (though Annette managed nearly 11% on the numbers I looked at which was amazing)</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They finished Top 3 about 2-3% of the time (again Annette was higher at around 4.7%)

So it seems that some top players at least will finish in the Top 3 roughly 50% of the time they Final Table.</SPAN>

 

Originally Posted by Punter64

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>A couple of years back, I looked at 6 players in the Top 10 and took their results from UB, stars and FTP then crunched the numbers;</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>These guys on average won 1% of the MTTs they entered</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They cashed between 14% and 17% of the time</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They reached a Final Table between 4% and 6% of the time (though Annette managed nearly 11% on the numbers I looked at which was amazing)</SPAN>

<SPAN class=058425113-28032007>They finished Top 3 about 2-3% of the time (again Annette was higher at around 4.7%)

So it seems that some top players at least will finish in the Top 3 roughly 50% of the time they Final Table.</SPAN>

But, here comes a chicken and the egg argument. Are these players TOP 10 because they top 3 50% of the time that they make a final table, or is it because they finish in the top 3 so often, it makes them top 10.

There are lots of talented poker players, to be in the top 10 (where statistics only count for a year, and weight is given for performance in the last 3 months), these players are all running good at the time they are in the top 10. This isn't a slam (not anyone can be top 10), but I think it's realistic as well.

So, I wonder if it's realistic to expect 50% top 3 finishes if you make the final table. Then again, if 9 are at the final table, you should make it 33% of the time if your equal. So, 40% of the time over the long haul is probably realistic.