I'm sure it could be done, but anyone who is capable of doing so will move up before then.

Can't this be explained easily by recognizing that winning players are much, much more willing to share their results than breakeven or losing player? I would expect as much.

FWIW, here is my win rate for each of the past 6 years:

2006: $14.38 over 383.0 hours, playing almost exclusively 1/2 NL
2007: $37.72 over 658.5 hours, playing mostly 1/2 NL and some 2/5 NL
2008: $52.94 over 728.5 hours, playing mostly 2/5 NL
2009: $51.00 over 819.0 hours, playing almost exclusively 2/5 NL
2010: $30.05 over 752.0 hours, playing mostly 2/5 NL and some 5/10 NL
2011: $30.31 over 789.0 hours, playing mostly 2/5 NL and some 5/10 NL

I think this is a pretty significant sample size. Combination of the games getting tougher in 2010 and 2011 at the places I play, and running less well than I had in prior years.

Very interesting, ty for sharing. My numbers look similar.

I don't soicalize much w/ other players -live, but also have a since of tougher games the last 2 years. My win rate percentage has droped also. Depending on how you plug your numbers into a comparision it seems your win rate has droped 30% or so. Do you attribute this drop more to tougher games, or "running less well"?

PS, I'm currently banging away around $37 per hour at the 2/5 games, but at the rate its declining I hope to still be close to $30 per hour by the end of the year...

I think the games definitely have gotten tougher. Combo of more online players playing live (UIGEA/BF) and fewer rich fish (no more rich mortgage brokers and such that were spewing money at the tables a couple of years ago).

I heard that Dan Harrington once said that if you are crushing the game you will win 10bb/hr. I suppose thats less than 5% of solid players though

Yes. 2011 with 950 hours of play at 1/2 I made $22/hour. Although, lifetime at 1/2 over 4 years, it's about $18/hr. I'm sure there are others.

Results may vary.

Nice stats. Where and when did you play? My 2011 playing almost exclusively 2/5 was around 22$ hour but i was playing 9 handed with a preflop rake and 1 $ ante before the cards were even dealt. Something around 700 hours as well.

Clicked for information. Found nothing yet!

This really depends on how well the player is managing their money. If they have significant bankroll management issues, ie, run off to play craps to recoup a loss, then they may be stuck playing 1/2 for a long time.

Don't think the really successfull 1-2 players stay at 1-2 for long periods of time. They move up usually. Of course a lot of them come right back down to 1-2 also LOL

It seems unlikely that a person without the discipline to stay away from craps tables would have the discipline to be a significant winner over a large sample of hands at the poker table. I'm sure these people exist, but I'm guessing they'd be pretty rare.

You think those types are rare? Ivey Syndrome is common among winning poker players IMO.

Note to mods. Please rename title to "The besserwissers thread" please.

It's interesting to see that you were beating 2/5 to the tune of 10 BB/hr for a couple years, and then your win rate fell back down to 6 BB/hr for the past two years. Can this really be attributed to the games becoming more difficult? My experience has been the opposite.

Since late in '06, I've been playing the vast majority of my hours at 2/5, and my win rate has gone up every year. I know I can still improve my play, make fewer mistakes etc., so I'm pretty confident that 15 BB/hr is sustainable where I play. I'm currently (last 1,500 hours) beating the game for just shy of 13 BB/hr. There are a few 2/5 players in the room who, if I had to guess, win at a higher rate than me, so I do believe 15 BB/hr is sustainable.

Relatively rare? Yeah.

Just my opinion, but the games I play in are no where near as loose/crazy as in the good ol' days. I'm lucky if I can identify two fish on a table (if I'm not the fish myself).

I used to play primarily at the Borgata ($10/hour time charge), but now play almost exclusively in Charles Town, WV ($6 rake + $1 BBJ drop). But try to find an excuse to play poker whenever I travel for work or while on vacation, so have played all over the country (Miami, Tampa, New Orleans, Oklahoma, KC, St. Louis, LA, San Jose, Edmonton).

Maybe I'm off here but I wouldn't expect that to be rare.

I certainly wouldn't equate the discipline required to become a winning poker player with the discipline to avoid the pits. Apples and oranges IMO.

In all areas of life you will find extremely successful people that can't beat their addiction demons.

Just my $0.02 USD.

Are big win rates possible? Yes
Are they probable? No

Has OP studied statistics and confidence intervals? _______

Your $0.02 is spot on. Someone mentioned Phil Ivey, and he's the perfect example. Absolutely crushes it at poker, then plays high stakes craps where the house always has an edge. But when life is easy like it is for Ivey, he can afford to dump $ at craps. The vast majority of us cannot.

The rake at Charles Town is a huge drain. I used to play mostly at Borgata too, now I play at parx. My win rate has increased quite a bit since making the switch. parx has a $1,000 max buy-in, vs $500 at Borgata. And I believe Borgata's game might be tougher. A lot of losing poker players have high paying day jobs that prevent them from making it down to Atlantic City mid-week. Parx reels in these players nightly.

Well, someone who can beat the game for a relatively high winrate is going to be rare in the first place. Someone who can crush the game long term and doesn't have the discipline to stay away from the pit games is going to be even more rare.

I think we are debating what the term "rare" actually means though.

No. My post wasn't about that. Read it again. We're a community in and of itself on this site, I'm speaking about the group of people that comprise that community. No one here ever posts anything but a massive winrate at 1/2 NL.

yo midnight - I'm with you on this one --- I believe the upper edge of w/r possibility on 2/5 is 15bb/hr. But that is the very very upper limit. Like I have said b4 I dont boast about w/r but I was shooting the breeze with a kid whose game I respect and he showed me his w/r on his phone 9.5bb/hr...and I honestly figured he beat the game for around 50 bux an hour.

Why would you assume that someone would post their winrate if they weren't doing well?

I'm saying nicely, or was saying nicely until now, that I think there are a ton of people on forums like these who lie through their teeth about how well they do. I sincerely doubt that we have as many people on here as claimed who routinely take huge amounts out of 1/2 NL games, especially when some of these same people show up in other threads with stuff that completely contradicts their earlier comments about winning $25+ hourly.