I enjoy reading all these tables, i think absorbing this kind of information can improve your game greatly overtime, i think eventually someone will come up with an exact formula which works for everyone but without trial and error that would never happen... i dont think a single table will ever truly show the "best player" purely because of variance i can look at that table and see there are players above me who i feel i have a big edge over, but i can also see people below me who would crush me in the long term, but in terms of recent form and hot streaks then its a great barometer of who is currently "in the zone" pokerwise.... Another thing which would come into things and probably wont ever be able to be factored in is, if someone multi-tables 16 mtts in one night and manages 2 wins and 4 cashes then that would be far better than someone who plays 1 mtt a night for 16 consecutive days and manages 2 wins and 4 cashes also. good work Aussie Posted by jordz16
thanks jordz.
i don't think that i am on the table. i actually haven't checked. my point was that i expect that i am not higher than you. i will go and see.
I think this is a great idea, I'll look forward to checking where I am each week/ month. The point system works fine, the people who play more games are going to get more 1sts so deserve to be at the top. I think the biggest issue with the list is that someone who wins a tournament with a field of 25 players will get the same points as someone who wins a tournament with 500 players when the latter is far more impressive. That being said, Its just a fun list anyway and it isn't going to accurately show who's the best. Its nice that the people who do well can get some recognition.
I think this is a great idea, I'll look forward to checking where I am each week/ month. The point system works fine, the people who play more games are going to get more 1sts so deserve to be at the top. I think the biggest issue with the list is that someone who wins a tournament with a field of 25 players will get the same points as someone who wins a tournament with 500 players when the latter is far more impressive. That being said, Its just a fun list anyway and it isn't going to accurately show who's the best. Its nice that the people who do well can get some recognition. Posted by FeelGroggy
There does tend to be a rough correlation between buy in and field size so this evens it out a bit as the only games included have to have £500 guarantee but I do get your point. If you start ranking tournaments then that is subjective and would cause a new discussion point.
I think this is a great idea, I'll look forward to checking where I am each week/ month. The point system works fine, the people who play more games are going to get more 1sts so deserve to be at the top. I think the biggest issue with the list is that someone who wins a tournament with a field of 25 players will get the same points as someone who wins a tournament with 500 players when the latter is far more impressive. That being said, Its just a fun list anyway and it isn't going to accurately show who's the best. Its nice that the people who do well can get some recognition. Posted by FeelGroggy
thanks groggy,
coincidentally i just noticed your name on the list. doing well.
your point about field size is important. i see that too and my figures include a point for a cashing which is linked to field size.
This table is good. It would also be good to occasionally see 1 that only tracked the 20:00/20:30 tournaments, as these could be viewed as Sky's "majors". Due to the larger fields in these, points are harder to earn....
In Response to Re: * * * skypoker best player * * * : This table is good. It would also be good to occasionally see 1 that only tracked the 20:00/20:30 tournaments, as these could be viewed as Sky's "majors". Due to the larger fields in these, points are harder to earn.... Phil Posted by Essexphil
In Response to Re: * * * skypoker best player * * * : This table is good. It would also be good to occasionally see 1 that only tracked the 20:00/20:30 tournaments, as these could be viewed as Sky's "majors". Due to the larger fields in these, points are harder to earn.... Phil Posted by Essexphil
We did have that with Slipwaters table but he has now retired that table so maybe Aussie could add something in now Slip has let the site down....I mean unable to continue to do the table!
Like it Aussie, I'd like to see a monthly and yearly one, top 300 would be good to include more people Great stuff! Graham Posted by StayOrGo
I agree. Great stuff Aussie, i think this is valuable information for anyone who plays on this site and I reckon will serve to boost motivstion and turnout for more players.
Also just a query about how the table is compiled, which at the moment is done by highest points to lowest. Basically I think it could be useful to see the current table filtered to see the top 300 in order of how many games played, then you could see player performance based around the volume being put in. Or maybe it's not that big a deal. Thoughts guys?
One thing this table points out, is how resilient even the best poker players have to be! Congrats to kc8 on having the lead and 8 wins out of 345 games. He still had to cope however, with being beaten 338 times during this period :=) It's a tough way for an easy living! :=) Cheers, Graham Posted by StayOrGo
Maybe just add the points per game value as an extra column..... Posted by Benchmark
Actually this would be a very good idea. This would give a better idea of the better player than the total of points based on sheer volume.
If you don't want to add more columns, combined the up and down directions and magnitude columns by just showing last month's position in brackets or something
Comments
thanks jordz.
i don't think that i am on the table. i actually haven't checked. my point was that i expect that i am not higher than you. i will go and see.
argh, **** it. i am 334th.
I think the biggest issue with the list is that someone who wins a tournament with a field of 25 players will get the same points as someone who wins a tournament with 500 players when the latter is far more impressive.
That being said, Its just a fun list anyway and it isn't going to accurately show who's the best. Its nice that the people who do well can get some recognition.
coincidentally i just noticed your name on the list. doing well.
your point about field size is important. i see that too and my figures include a point for a cashing which is linked to field size.
it is fun. that's what it is meant to be.
cheers man and good luck.
This table is good. It would also be good to occasionally see 1 that only tracked the 20:00/20:30 tournaments, as these could be viewed as Sky's "majors". Due to the larger fields in these, points are harder to earn....
Phil
hi phil and thanks.
Great stuff!
Graham
thanks graham.... and vwp
My son says thanks too. He's Limp2Lose (doing OK as well)
Thanks,
Graham
Congrats to kc8 on having the lead and 8 wins out of 345 games.
He still had to cope however, with being beaten 338 times during this period :=)
It's a tough way for an easy living! :=)
Cheers,
Graham
Actually this would be a very good idea. This would give a better idea of the better player than the total of points based on sheer volume.
If you don't want to add more columns, combined the up and down directions and magnitude columns by just showing last month's position in brackets or something
Cheers,
Graham
We're gonna need a 'Sky Poker Best Looking Player' thread for me to make an impact.
I should go start that now.