Pro vs Donk/Fish/Newbie/... debate

Looking @ Ferguson's most recent chart, and even in the text of FT's statement, it shows and mentions how it took CF several weeks to get to just the $7 mark. But then if you look at August (ish) of 2007, once he was in decent money he was able to grow his BR pretty quickly. Could this not (sort of) help to show that it might actually be harder to make $$ at the lower levels than the higher levels?

Definitely, but when growing your BR, you have to start somewhere and that is why its called grinding because of the amount of time it takes at the lower levels.
But through the grinding stages you gain so much knowledge about poker and learned the 3 most important aspects(IMO) of poker and that is patience, discipline and proper BRM.
And with this knowledge and BRM you will increase your BR faster at the higher levels due to less suckouts as the level of play becomes more experienced.

I can't add much more to this. You just nailed the perfect answer . I'm currently attempting 0-1000$ and currently sitting at 25$ and it definitely feels nice to actually be able to get there from 0. Now I'm practicing my br management and patience at 1$ level.

To be patient is what it's all about. One can have a gazillion hands delt to them, but waiting on the right ones is the pay off and that is where the BR starts building even on the smaller tables.

Kinda-maybe-sorta but not really?

What you'd actually need to look at is his win rate / ROI figures at each level.

The overall graph will make it seem like it's harder to win at lower levels because, in absolute terms, you win less money at those levels for the time invested. ROI and win rates for the individual levels will tell the real story.

Sure the winrate and ROI will tell you alot but the general question was this:
And the answer is in blue

His graph peaked at 28K ish and is now down to 9K, a 19K loss, so no, probably isn't harder to make money at lower levels.

OK, but if that's the answer you've settled on then I'm not really sure why you asked the question in the first place: it's obviously a lot easier to win $100 playing a $25-$50 cash game than it is to win $100 playing $1 SnGs.

It's also easier to lose $500 in a $25-$50 cash game as opposed to $1 SnGs, which is why I'm suggesting that ROI is actually the figure you should be interested in.

They were actually answering a question I asked.

If I remember right, Chris got the huge spike in his bankroll because he stretched his BRM rules a bit and won an Omaha 8 tournament.

Also please note that you do not play as well as Chris Ferguson. No, no you don't.

I was actually posting this as a general question. But thank you for pointing this out, I really thought I was as good as him. He has 5 bracelets and I am not yet able to dominate a $3 STT... but I really thought I was that good I feel loved here when I post sometimes.

I just mean to note that when everyone quotes is bankroll requirements/etc. in his "challenge" they fail to account for the difference in skill level when setting out on the same path.

^^good point as well, and this makes people think they can do it as easily or as fast as him, therfor more people don't understand why they can't do it. This is a good post tho and brings up good points and discussion!

Hear, hear !! I'm just short of $30 from -0- on FT. Won't deposit online -ever. I'm still working the 25c/50c stud rings from time to time (after I watch a table for a while). Chipping away at the MTT FR's little by little.

BRM is the toughest part. Those few sheckles are always burning a hole in the pocket and I have to keep those crazy impulses in check. Most will take their 50c winnings and run off to a micro table and donk it off. A little tougher on FT with the higher buy-ins, so I'm just keeping to the grind.

Good luck to the rest of you with a foot on the ladder ...

One of the best posts I have seen on CC

I certainly agree there is a skill level difference, but following the same path pattern, it's just a much slower trek for those of us with inferior skills.

I don't expect I'll ever reach the $10,000 level, but if you stay within whatever levels you CAN perform well in, a constant improvement in BR should be possible. It will take me longer, but it's all - one step at a time.

I think where the big difference comes in for most is that first larger MTT win. I struggle in NLHE MTT's, but can make it ITM often enough not to lose that meager BR. My own path will certainly be slower mainly because I try to stick to limit games, an area I know well and am comfortable with.

I'd love to play on a table with Chris (or another pro) one day, but it would be just for the sheer enjoyment of it, understanding I would be a likely candidate to get my bottom spanked ...

Ah - yeah, sorry about that. Got you two confused

No sweat. I thought AG was pointing a finger at me, when he actually meant "you" in a general term. It's hard to "hear" a message board sometimes

WORD /\ /\

It is out of that assumption I found out that since I have less variance, I can have a smaller bankroll at the higher limits.