Nathan J. excels at money management. He knows that you can quit when you are down, but should just keep going when you are up. The nights (that you are not there) that he wins thirty and forty dollars amply make up for the nights he loses ten. He does lose more often than he winds, but he definitely wins more money than he loses.

Here's the original discussion with Cory. I think the last note about Cory and Allison is still dead on, as far as time in the game is concerned, but Cory has improved somewhat to a -5 or maybe a hair better. He ended up leaving ten or fifteen dollars up on the night last night, by the way, even after playing really, really badly for most of the night.

I'll give you more of my opinion than I should here, but I'll give you my approximate scores for a game evaluation. Anything plus is a good game. And remember, this is in relation to me, and might be different for another player. I don't know Troy, but Nathan J is -5, Nathan W is -5, your are right at zero, Daylan is +10 (too bad he's short-stacked or he could be +30, too), Bob is +10, Cody is +5, Allison is zero, Larry is +15, Joe is +30, Anthony is -10, Ramona is +10 (so they equal out), Misty is +5 (being short-stacked), and Rachel is about +10. Obviously the higher the total, the better the game is going to be for me. However, I would point out that Tina is -10 (because she plays with my money) and The two Nathans usually only take money from the pot, and not directly from me, so I still don't think they are better than me. And Anthony is more like a -5 or a zero when he's broke, which has been the case lately, but when he has a stack to play he can be a -20 or worse.
Another note is that I am much more nervous going into a game that includes the two Nathans, Tina, and Anthony, and if that was the cast, I would actually refuse to play. I don't actually do all this math before a game, by the way, but I'm just putting numbers to nebulous concepts that do float through my mind. And before you berate me for giving you a zero rating, don't forget that I bragged on how good a player Allison is and I rated her the same as you. On the other hand, the later it is, the worse she gets, whereas you seem to get more stable as time goes by.
Maybe I spend too much time thinking about poker.

I believe I based the ratings (and I can't remember which was good, positive or negative, but I am going to assume a positive rating was good for me) thing on what one person was likely to leave at or take from the table, adjusting accordingly if they somehow singularly affected my play (Tina for instance, who is about a +3 or +4, but since she is playing with my money tends to affect me as if she were a -10). I'd say Daylan is a pretty square +10, because he usually loses fifteen to twenty, but occasionally gets lucky. He actually played quite solid poker one night when it was me and him head to head, but he still would have lost to me, if he hadn't had four of a kind to my full boat, twice. I ended up winning a dollar or two. He raises pre-flop on aces, and sometimes that is correct, and sometimes it is stupid. Of course, it is correct a huge percentage more of the time the less people there are playing, so I guess in head to head game his pre flop shenanigans are not so bad. A couple of night after that, though, I saw him raise pre-flop and then fold after AKQ flopped. One has to assume that either he was holding a pocket pair and correctly folded them, which he is not likely to do, or he was just raising on crap.
By the way, the only reason I called his all-in bet was because he said "I am going to go all-in in two hands," and then did. If you'd been kind enough to tell me you were holding ace-king I would have gladly let you go it alone.