how much are these guys making on average at the different levels does anyone know/want to venture a guess?

to bad there isnt a tracking site or something that can tell us that

funny guy, i just wanted an hourly or something for a standard reg of each level... sharkscope only tells the number of games and profit but i dunno if all the games are hypers and what stakes...

bout tri fidy

They are all millionaires, driving great cars, party all night long.. trust me:-)

There are other features of sharkscope available to subscribers who can filter search.

Also there are other sites too.

Is there a site that is showing statistics even if a player blocked his/her stats @ Stars via opt-out?

I believe often the blocked players, well not so often the blocked players unblock their stats temporarily whilst audits are taken on their games so be quick and check often those who are blocked!

Yeah so what's a realistic hourly for a $100s reg?

in general as an average, counting rakeback and everything, a decent reg earns about 1BI per hour (whatever stake).

talking about hourly strictly. Some guys will have 2bi/hourly but earn less than other ppl who grind ****loads with 1/bi hour.. so hourly is not everything to count. Again its an average. Some people will earn more than others because they are better, or more disciplined, basically.

I agree but see hourlys decreasing significantly with sharky queue getting longer and longer; a decent reg could for example 4 table grind 60s 1-2 years ago against bronze/silver star fishes; today he has to wait in queue with other 20 players waiting to sit first..
And I doubt that 4 tabling 4 different regs to keep up pace is so much +ev

1-2 years ago people playing hypers were making disproportionately more money than the rest of the poker community. Given that if you just raised lots and cbet lots and played with over 60% vpip oop you could be playing 60s the landscape has justifiably changed.

i m talking about today averages, i dont think many regs at 100+ struggle to have 1bi/hourly.

yes, in the past, b4 black friday and sharky, the hourlies were better. Still ****loads of money to be made though so np.

The hourlies pre black friday were not better than today on average (for husngs).

For some people, sure (just like some people did better during the great depression than the roaring 20s), but not on average.

Watergun, RE 1-2 years ago, it was a new game, and it got popular very quickly. For every bad thing that bad players did 2 years ago, there were plenty of regs that did bad things too. This is true of poker at any time period, it was "easiest" 30 years ago, but not nearly as profitable.

Generally, the more popular a game gets, the more potential profit is there. Exceptions occur when progression stops, but that's an argument for a new structure imo.

Progression seemed to slow a little bit at the lower-mid levels for a bit, I think due to the software making it less enticing to sit regulars (bc of blind wait list and not being able to sit someone until they got all the way to the lobby). But that kind of quickly changed, bc there is plenty of difference in people's tolerance for downswings and plenty of edge to be had (thus the current situation where it's far more competitive once again). Enough people realized that taking turns with every regular regardless of differences in skill was not the best decision for themselves.

well.. i remember in 2011 i could pretty easily 4table 200-300 fish straight for quite a few hours, in this scenario its rly hard to not have a better hourly, considering today having 1 table up constantly is a miracle. So saying hourlies werent better because of reg pool skill is a bit exaggerating lol

but at the same its true that no one in the leaderboard was doing that much better than today at all anyway.

More like.. action seems much worse, but profits look similar for top winners. Seems like people in between and below top ones are the ones suffering the most.

Yep, pretty good post imo!
I looked at some sharkscope graphs of some multi-table grinders with over 100k games sample that have been grinding a certain level without moving up in stakes over the last years; their graphs slabbed significantly within the last 1-2 years; here I am speaking of the mid-low stakes..

If you change your 2011 to 2012, I think you're right.

2012 was sick, but seems 2013 > 2011 (way more people blocked in 2013 fwiw, so leaderboard is very misleading).

Not sure about mid stakes getting worse either. When you include rewards, there were many guys at $60-200 doing very well last time we did a study (first half of 2013 for those reg war award things).

There are more regs probably, so easier to find people struggling if you want to (especially since you've been around awhile, so you know a lot of guys), but the top at every level seem to be eating caviar still (perhaps even more caviar than in most years past).

I'd anticipate 2014 being even better at low do mid stakes for the best players. With groups in full swing, a lot less of the coveted recreational action will be taken by very weak regs. It was that way for the last 2 years and that seems to have changed.

No predictions about high stakes, while it has boomed the last 3 years, a lot of high stakes guys are hiding themselves/aren't visible in main stream poker, and that can't be a good thing for future growth. Hopefully the sick fun structure of the game continues to overcome that.

In the past guys like Olivier successfully became visible outside of HUSNGs and helped shine a light on our game. The guys currently at the top aren't really doing the same thing. Hopefully we see Jungleman and Ike play more and do better, as they are quite visible to the mainstream poker world and plenty interested in players noticing them.

where can i see the cartel members' list?

xxxh0lic declined after two games Does cartel rules apply to 60's cartel? Just out of curiosity...

yes, some of your cartel slaves are rebelling

$60 cartel members need to give 30 minutes of action when sitting or are sat.

If you decline because you have to go somewhere or already playing a reg on a different table it's ok to decline but you must advise your "division chat" - and ideally advise your opponent.
If you don't advise your division chat, you'll get investigated and potentially receive an infraction.

Seriously is this a level? The cartel is BS, any decent players many will decline versus. One player specifically I know but will not name as he is a decent person refused to play people on sit list. Cartel leaders said we will throw you out (he is in the best 5 players in the 60 cartel) he said fine I will sit you all.... so they said forget it your still in cartel looooloool. $60 cartel mugs you know it is true and you know who the player is you threatened to kick out who then said I will sit you all so you changed your mind. Cartel is simply full of glorified bum hunters and people from higher stakes creating ways of getting passes at lower level versus 100 regs. I am not even a hyper hu player yet 80% of the $60 cartel would lose to me over a period of games

Cartel Leader: Player A you are not abiding by cartel rules
Player A: I don't want to play certain regs
Cartel Leader: We will throw you our of the $60 cartel
Player A: OK I will sit you all starting with you
Cartel Leader: Maybe we have been hasty!

SOUND FAMILIAR CARTEL COWARDS?????

By the way, "potentially" = "more than likely" in the paragraph above if the player hasn't notified their division chat in advance.

If you knew how much work some leaders were putting into the $60 cartel to reduce the free rider problem you would be surprised (and from what I hear the $100's are putting in just as much work).

If you or anyone else experience a situation where someone quits before 30 minutes, feel free to pm me - you can make it public if you like but I just feel it's not a great way to add value to this thread.

Btw, threatening a leader to avoid an infraction will not be effective and will lead to a worse outcome to the player issuing the threats.
If you have details of this happening in the past please pm me or publicly state the names of the people involved.

I am not playing hypers at the moment even tho I won my last few sessions. It is good for you guys to admit and address there is a free rider problem. Like you say I would be surprised but that is only because of the last few months how cartel has acted. In the past I have identified loads who decline and sometimes lame excuses were given, sometimes players were reprimanded.

We all know the players who were threatened with sanctions but said 'ok kick me out I shall play you first'. If a player has done nothing to me then I am hardly going to make his alias public and drag it all back up.

When players new to the 60 cartel scene post here asking questions I will just speak from my experiences as I believe players are better off attacking the cartel than trying to get in. If you beat players in the cartel consistently most won't play you even if you are on a sit list. Why would ANY group want to keep playing somebody who beats them. The only thing I do believe has actually happened to make the $60 cartel more respectable is that the 'data swapping' by some players has been frowned upon as a result stopped happening probably. If a player is doing a tonne of work in $60 cartel unpaid then WHYYYYYYYY? The 60 cartel has too many members for it to be anywhere near efficient.