90% of players win online? really?
Well when I started in poker I lost a lot of money, in fact I lost several grand and went broke. I learned a valuable lesson went and did some research applied proper bank roll management and won back several grand. I have dabbled in cash games only briefly, the vast vast majority of my time online is spent in tournaments/ sit and goes and has always been this way. I just noticed a few odd things about Sharkscope
Firstly I know I lost several grand so why does Sharkscope show my peak lowest point at been minus 600 only or something?
I noticed that it starts me on $600 well I won came first in the very sit and go I played on pokerstars
. it was an $12 180 player turbo sit and go. Don't congratulate me for that I chased every flush draw and straight draw and seemed to never miss and played many hands I shouldn't off. EG it was a fluke. Well could that be why I started on 600, cause I only deposited 50 on my first deposit.
well Now my stats show me been positive ROI ok not much just %2, but it didn't seem right. See when I started poker I had four grand. I went broke. I started to win after i took time out did research and came back. I have been winning since december and cashed out several times.
I work variable hours in my day job so only make 200 a week.
so If i won back everything I lost and a little profit why do I only have 2k now? what happened to the rest? were talking 25 weeks. thats 5k Separate, to any poker winnings. I have not deposited on poker stars since January, and only deposited $50 once for full tilt and once for partypoker
since then and thats it.
I of course deposited $600 to take advantage of the recent reload bonus a few days back.
However that aside whats going on. Ok i pay rent and food and spend liberally, but have I been spending it all?
Well something strange I noticed about Sharkscope is despite them saying 24 or 26% of players profit from sit and goes on poker stars you find a different picture if you look for yourself. I notice that pick any player at random and about 90% show positive ROI.
why? I thought only 24% should. see I wanted to know if I am ready to move up stakes again and took a sample of 100 for each stake to compare seriously 90% of the players I looked up out of 200 showed positive ROI.
So before I get the last year and a halfs worth of bank statements and check properly does if I show a positive ROI on sharkscope and a positive profit which I do is it possible I could still be a losing sit and go player?
Are Sharkscope/Poker stars involved in a conspiracy to decieve players into thinking there winning players when there not.
ps I know 200 may seem like a small amount of data but I have looked up stats many times before and not recorded and most of the time the ROI is positive.
I don't have the original data but I can make new data besides unwitnessed collected data is useless because i could easily fix it.
ROI should be negative most of the time.
I am confident enough to give out my aim run through this with anyone who would challenge me on this and admit publicly if I am proven wrong.
most players on shark scope show up positive ROI, most players on shark scope should show negative ROI.
something is amiss someone explain it to me.