Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:26 pm GMT by zeroswarm
What sort of spread of playing ability have we got on the thp forum at the moment?
If you were asked to give yourself a rating on how good you are at hold em what would it be?
I've listed 9 options below. Cast your vote in the category you would place yourself in and we might get a picture of the playing strength here. Honesty is needed please.... 
1. Raw beginner.
2. Very new to the game (been playing a few weeks) and still not sure what I'm doing.
3. Been playing a while and am beginning to improve.
4. Well past the novice stage and starting to understand the game.
5. Average player, breaking about even.
6. Slightly above the average player; making a bit of money out of the game simply by taking advantage when other players make poor decisions.
7. Good player, well above average, able to take poor tables to pieces on a regular basis. Also making a fair amount of money out of the game.
8. Very good player, able to mix it with the best and come up trumps.
9. Pro player, playing hold em for a living.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:47 pm GMT by khaosanroad
I think there are some 7' and 8's that might consider themselves pro's.
Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:51 pm GMT by cayouche
You forgot to put # 10-19 for Supa.
Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:07 pm GMT by Skribbles
Wow. I guess this forum is full of nothing but amazing players on the verge of going pro....
Polls like this are useless. People think waaaay to highly of themselves...
Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:20 pm GMT by aaronw
| Skribbles wrote: | Wow. I guess this forum is full of nothing but amazing players on the verge of going pro....
Polls like this are useless. People think waaaay to highly of themselves... |
Its not because people think too highly of themselves (even though they do), its because of who they are comparing themselves to. People are comparing themselves to the people they play at THEIR stakes. A $100NL player is comparing himself to other players at that level. If he is a winning player, he will think he is really good, which he is RELATIVE to players at THAT level. The problem is people comparing themselves to players at the level they play currently, not comparing themselves to all the players. (If that were the case, most of us would probably be less than a 5)
***Disclaimer- This is just my opinion and I may be VERY wrong!
Posted Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:27 pm GMT by MrDarling
its true, I do compare my self to player at my level.
Compare to them, I suck - I most. Since I'm almost out of another deposit.
But, then again, I only play the micro levels so if I compare to $100NL I might be a great player
Posted Sat Dec 16, 2006 3:14 am GMT by exit music
There should be 2 different sliding scales, one for Amateurs and one for Pros. There are easily 10 degrees of amature and definitely 10 degrees of pro. Most of us forum lurkers would at best rate 6-8 on the amatuer scale if we are really lucky. A player like Phil Ivey or Sami Farha is not just a 9, they are in the 7-8-9 zone on the pro side. There's a difference between Phil Ivey and the avarage family man playing 10 tables of 5/10 limit poker 5-6 hours a day, making a good percentage of his living from rakeback alone.
Another question:
Where on the pro sliding scale do you rate some players?
Ivey? Gus Hansen? Eric Lindgren? They aren't even close to those spazzy pros who can be brilliant at times and tilty moronic at other times like Mattasow or Phil helmuth.
I'm somewhere between 5 and 6.
Posted Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:42 am GMT by snoogins47
To put 'Pro' as the ultimate rating, even if it's just on this forum, is nowhere near accurate. I've been playing for a living for... hell, what's it been, 2 years now? And I'm clearly not the strongest player here. Exit Music is spot on. I'm gonna give myself the 9 rating anyway, since I deserve it.
Posted Sat Dec 16, 2006 6:39 am GMT by supafrey
I gave myself a twelve, but because I know Phil so well, I only gave him an eleven.
Posted Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:17 am GMT by raisebot
I gave myself a 1, only because theres no 0
Posted Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:06 am GMT by nicthestick
do these ratings go into the negative? because I am not good, I know enough to really suck.
Posted Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:25 pm GMT by Det_Jimmy
6,and that's all I have to say about that.
Posted Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:19 pm GMT by kingetje
what is meant by this sentence in 7?
| Quote: | | Also making a fair amount of money out of the game. |
Posted Mon Dec 18, 2006 5:04 pm GMT by UrAteUp
They don't make a scale big enough to hold Supa's skill level (or his ego).
I rate myself a 6. Slightly above average. I make money playing but not alot. Could be I play in the donk levels (mini micros) and players there tend not to understand all this biz about odds and probabilities. I know if I moved up to the levels I play live then I would walk away a winner....because I always do when I play live.
Posted Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:31 pm GMT by Sean_in_NJ
| kingetje wrote: | what is meant by this sentence in 7?
| Quote: | | Also making a fair amount of money out of the game. |
|
I'm afraid our definitions of "fair amount" are far too disparate to be quantified.
I've pegged myself at 5, just because my break-evenness is legendary.
Posted Tue Dec 19, 2006 3:51 am GMT by jimmer
I'm somewhere between 3 and 6. I Have now been playing a while (4years) and am starting to improve. I wouldn't say I'm above average, but I can take advantage from others making poor decisions. Over the last four years I've made alot more money than I've lost, but this is all on the micro limits.
Three years ago, I'd have rated myself as a 8. But knowing now, what I knew then, I was actually on a 1 (raw beginner). Yes, I made money and I thought I was good, but there was no chance I could mix it up with the $5-$10 cash tables.
Therefore I'll rate myself as a 3.
Posted Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:31 pm GMT by zeroswarm
Well, some of the options could have been worded better, thats my fault I guess.... 
The point of this was really to see the spread of playing ability we have on here. From the results so far it seems we have a fair number of "just above average players", with a few good or very good players.
We have obviously also got a few new or fairly new players who are reading the forums which makes me wonder whether a "beginners" section might possibly be in order?
Posted Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:36 pm GMT by zinn0
http://www.texasholdem-poker.com/forum/f10/beginners-questions?sid=11a28a1154ccc182f6ca2ca9b6d0f461
Posted Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:49 pm GMT by TheSalche
| zinn0 wrote: | | http://www.texasholdem-poker.com/forum/f10/beginners-questions?sid=11a28a1154ccc182f6ca2ca9b6d0f461 |
Posted Wed Dec 20, 2006 7:24 am GMT by zeroswarm
Completely forgot that was there, lol.
|
|
