I recently updated the Wall Street Poker League website to include lifetime stats dating back to the beginning of the league. What I found were some pretty interesting data finds. I was scouring the data to try to figure out who the best player has been (this includes official tourneys only, not cash which is tracked on a separate spreadsheet). I haven’t come to a good conclusion because of some confusion on how to measure “the best”.
One measure of tracking is pure profit. How much one is up playing tourneys. In that regard, I am in the lead with $773.50 in total profit. However, this is a super silly stat because I have more tourneys under my belt than anyone else, 179.
If we want to get to a better measurement, we might use avg $/tourney which mitigates the number played to some extent. In that regard, LJ is out in front with $24.93 avg. per tourney. But this is somewhat disingenious because LJ has only played in 15 tourneys! This might just be a great run of luck. Is 15 enough games to determine an accurate avg.? If we start going into the higher numbers of tourneys, the winner seems to be Michael Brown, who has 90 tourneys under his belt with an impressive $8.13 avg./tourney. My own avg., by the by, is *only* $4.32. I say ‘only’ because that’s still ahead of the curve, but it’s not the best performance. Even though I have twice the number of tourneys that Michael has, 90 is still a significant number.
Interestingly, W, who has won the League title twice, only has an avg. of $3.64 with 140 tourneys played. Looking at the Placement Count backs this up as I see that W places 3rd and 4th much more often than 1st, which is where the big money is. Michael and I, when we cash, do so more often in the 1 and 2 positions, which would explain why we have more money than W, but our league rankings are lower.
The question that I’m facing is basic: Which is the better stat? League ranking or Avg./tourney (with an acceptable minimum # of tourneys)? Any thoughts out there?