2008 Season two AVERAGES

[David]

NPL Results go a very short distance in telling you who is a good player and who isn't.

[AceLosesKing]

NPL Results go a very short distance in telling you who is a good player and who isn't.

While I agree with this in some aspects, it certainly separates the absolute shit players from the players that know how to read, and bluff.

Events like state finals, the Berri deepstack, and to some extent regional finals, certainly prove who can play poker, and who can't.

[David]

Sort of...

To me, results show who is a good NPL player, not a good poker player.

[Garth Kay]

Just so you all know.
From my online poker stats:
I generally finish in the money 20% of the time.10% is the norm; not the best strike rate but it is the norm for hold em tourneys.
I am out in the early to mid positions of tournaments around 50% of the time.
It is the same way I work in NPL tourneys as well. I will not place in the points 50% of the time, but if I am playing my game I will final table most of the time if I make it past the first break.
I think I have played 10 NPL games in the last two seasons that I actually have made a real attempt at finishing on the FT. And most people who have seen me play can attest to the FT percentages.

Another thing to remember is that most tourneys only pay out over the top 10% of runners. So if you're playing in a field of 30 then you are actually getting points for finishing in the top 50%.
But in a field of 90+ the FT is really indicative of a good poker performance.
I don't think I am making much sense, but my personal philosophy is: you can never judge how good a player is by their NPL results. The late stages of a tournament rely on luck, too much, and that takes a lot of the skill aspect away from the game.
I do believe a good player is someone that everyone respects when they sit at a table and that is "feared" as a poker player. Roger G I classify as a good player but his results do not speak volumes about his skill as a player.

I've gone off track here a bit. In my honest opinion the only true stat to use to judge is top 4 or 5 finishes, once you hit this mark it has incorporated every aspect of tourney play.

[BigPete33]

Some good points there.

I think Roger G is the best non-staff player I've seen playing in the NPL. His NPL record could definitely be better, but I think it's important to remember just what level we're playing at and that there's just plain going to be some bad calls made where it ends in tears for the 'better' player.

KK is now called Sergei Gilleemee

Dave's point is very valid with reference to how the NPL is a category of it's own when talking about how well a player is doing/has done. There's several people I would consider good NPL players but very very few of them that I would consider good poker players in the broad scheme of things. I'm a little hard to impress unless it involves boobies and/or football and/or Carlsberg though

Only slightly off topic, what I really get a kick out of is seeing new players (much like I was/am) taking it upon themselves to learn more and better their play yet still retain an interest in the social aspects which we all love about pub poker.

[Bacon]

When's the next skittles games then? I'll bring my man-boobies in a Liverpool top.. there's your 3 right there

My 2008 Season two was average, so bring on Season 4 (once football season is finished)

[Scotty]

Yet again, have to agree with the praise for Roger G, AKA Sergei Gilleemee.

[Laura]

Yet again, have to agree with the praise for Roger G, AKA Sergei Gilleemee.

LOL! That never gets old

[Matty Norwood]

umm i averaged 10 points per game