Syndicated columnist on Internet gambling

[RKuczek]

I was thinking along the lines of looking at a distribution of results, and looking for anomalous results which would prove that skill played a role, but, we would not necessarily need to do that. I do think that simply looking at some individual players and their performance over time might be meaningful and convincing.

I've played online for almost three years now, my total investment, made three years ago, was $50, never made additional deposits, and am still playing and have cashed out thousands in profit. I certainly have played more than 2,000 SnGs and tournaments, and my winnings haven't come from lucking out and hitting one big payday, but from grinding out a modest edge over many many tournaments/SnGs, many of them small money tournaments/SnGs. There are certainly some other players on UB that I am confident have earned a long term profit. I would guess that it would be possible to demonstrate that at least a few players have consistently earned a profit off their play over time, and that simple variance is not an adequate explanation of their performance.

Likewise, it might be possible to demonstrate the opposite, players that are so bad that luck can't explain their losses. I could nominate a few for that category as well.

Maybe looking at BJTers as a group, and their average performance might be enlightening.