different app, basically the same function

Bump

so much of this depends on game selection
if you sit in ****ty games all the time your win rate will suffer a lot
some people look at what they make per hour and actually think thats what theyll make for each hour they play, so theyll sit in a ****ty games all day long for no reason

I might be moving to Florida soon and they have 5/10 available live. My normal stakes online are 400NL so I was wondering what kind of winrate or hourly is pretty common or possible playing live at these stakes.

20 hands / hour. 15bb/100

5hours = 15 BB

15BB = 150

150/5 = 30$

And in best case 30 hands... game selection would be very beneficial.

This comes down to the classis argument as to whether or not online poker expectations translate into live poker expectations...and the answer is no they don't.

How are you going to track how many hands you play live in order to determine your bb/100 winrate? Anything you come up with will be an estimate, unless you are going to keep a count of every hand you play. So I think your better off asking about an hourly winrate to begin with...

In that case $30 an hour at 5/10 nl live is pretty weak. Say you put in 40 hrs per week, that means you're expecting to make $1200 by the end of it. The standard buy in for a 5/10 nl game is between 1k-3k, so in essence, a $30 an hour rate is only hoping to win maybe 1 buy in a week?? Playing full time?? I think $30/hr is at the very low end of the spectrum for live play...I'm sure there are people making this at 1/2 nl.

I'd say for a good player that understands how live differs from online play should be shooting for $60+ /hr. There are similar threads on here talking about $100/hr at 5/10.

No win rate is considered "common." there are so many variables, like how deep everyone is, how skilled they are, how skilled you are, etc. Suffice it to say, the best players in the game will win around 10 BB/hr, or $100/hr.

If you're a winner at 400nl- skills wise you'll be way ahead of the field at live 5/10. It all matters on how you adjust to these games (playing deeper, less hands per hour, spewing, leveling yourself etc etc). I have friends (best regs at the casino also 2k max buy in) who average $100/hr over a decent sample (live poker wise at least).

Gl

What's a decent sample?

General consensus among the most consistent winning Aria 5/10 regs is $100/hour. Anything over $80/hour is very good. There's one Aria player who crushes for significantly more.

Florida games are softer and higher winrates are attainable.

3k+ hours. I've had a 700ish hour stretch where I was breakeven due mostly to run bad. I wasn't as good then at live poker as I am now but I doubt I could have cut it back by much more than 100 hours even if it happened to me again starting tomorrow. I'm sure others have run worse than me too so 1k hour BE stretch doesn't seem impossible though I would guess it's pretty improbable for someone able to make $70/hr+ at 5/10.

over a years play avging 40hr weeks.

also again, they are the best 5/10 regs at the casino who also play 10/25 on weekends.

oh and it was before this casino implemented straddles.

LD, you think 70/hr is max for a good player?

Live sample size is so small that we never know if we are running hot or not.

Re: Sample Size

FWIW, my hourlies at the three 5/10 games I've played the most (Venetian, Aria, Wynn) are within $2 of each other. This is over 1970, 630 and 200 hours respectively.

There are games in this country where good players are making $100/hr...some more. 70/hr in any game is still quite good and depending on what game might be very good.

There are so many factors that go into winrate that it is crazy to spend any time on it.

Play 11am to 6pm monday thru friday at bellagio 5-10 then play thurs night 11pm til 6am thru sunday night and keep track of the difference in winrate for starters.

Then compare the Aria 5-10 game 3 years ago with the Aria 5-10 game of today and see if it is even worth a discussion. Its like different worlds entirely.

$5/10 nl is a transition limit, its a tricky game with its own little nuances inherent to only this level, ... I guess in a way all poker game levels could be considered "transition".

However the 5/10 nl game is the tipping point between capped games and non-capped games. Some 5/10 games are capped, some are not. You fall down to 2/5 and nearly ALL of the games are capped, jump up to 10/20 and ALL are non-capped games.
A couple of common issues are a smaller player pool, and a more diverse field -players coming up from capped games, and more advanced higher limit players playing this smaller stakes game. More often than not once a player reaches a point where he/she is playing a lot 5/10, they're also playing other games at different levels. And once you weigh the tipping point past 5/10 into ALL non-capped games no one has a win rate per hour, its imposible ...because it all depends on what game they're playing. IMO "win rates" are only applicable to get a general pulse on lower stakes games.

And FWIW, there isn't a real poker player that I know of that can't see though internet "posters" living the poker player lifestyle vicariously via the web....ok, off my high-horse

I agree. Winrates online work because the amount of volume you can get within a short period of time and also the stakes and buy ins are consistent.

Whereas live when you are playing a $1k capped 5/10 with $6/hand rake, your winrate will be different than when you are playing an uncapped game w/ avg stacks of $5k-6k and paying $12/hr.

Meh, I think winrates in general don't really exist. If you play 3k hours live you should get a good idea how you can do in similar game conditions though. However if you play 5/10 in 2 different parts of the country the game conditions could be very very different.

I do think rough estimates aren't terribly hard to make. It could probably be argued that winrates online are harder to accurately measure bc game conditions and and 100-120bb strategy has evolved so quickly towards GTO that winrates are continuing to dwindle for most players. Finding an accurate winrate over a 500k hand sample does you little to no good if your next 500k hands will be played at different stakes in likely different game conditions.

However live, I don't really thing the game conditions in my regular 5/10 game have changed hardly at all in the past 14 months. Regardless, generally speaking I don't think you should take a 1.5 year sample of live and expect to make that over the next 1.5 years even in the same game even if you knew you would run exactly the same because you can't ever predict when exactly game conditions will change and what exactly may cause it.

this post is key. winrates in live nl can only really be accurately tracked in lower stakes mainly 2-5 capped/5-10 capped ect because most of these games play generally the same for the most part.

when players start playing live 5-10 uncapped /10-20 uncapped+ winrates really get thrown out the window because these games play so much bigger/different then most smaller capped nl games.

ive played a ton at commerce 5-10 1500cap as well as a lot of 5-10 uncapped in vegas and the two dont even compare. 5-10 uncapped at aria (the most ive played in vegas) i think plays almost as big as 10/20 at commerce and ive played a bunch in all these games.

another good point you bring up is that when players get good enough to play uncapped live 5-10 they generally dont only exclusively stick to this limit but rather dangle around in other bigger nl games as well.

You can't get a good sample live, so no1 will ever know imo. I mean, what's considered a sufficient sample online, in terms of hands? If you tried to get that # live (and maybe you should) it would take years, and as mentioned you could never get the conditions to remain even close to the same throughout (or after).

People are incredibly optimistic when they talk about winrate IMO. We want to believe our edge is much greater than it is and we take way too much credit when we succeed- and otoh we blame bad luck almost exclusively when we lose. Those of you saying $100 bucks/hour is standard, would you be willing to bet even money you will win 200k in the next 12 months? How many of you are up 200k over the past 12 months?

I remember in '08 I had a friend (who was a very good live pro) talking about buying a yacht because he was crushing so much and live poker was so soft. Then he had a losing year in '09 and became a stock broker.

Lucid dream- props, man, I think your posts in general are some of the best on 2p2.

Basically 5/10 live if you are a winning player you can play a pretty boring, safe/nitty style that makes you a pretty decent/easy $50-60/hour with low variance... or you can play a more LAG style that will have far higher variance, where you are not afraid to mix it up again and again vs some of the best players in the game anytime any session, where you aren't afraid to play certain hands certain ways for image reasons, where you aren't only putting in big money when you have it... this way if you are a winning player you will still be profitable if you run bad, but if you are running decent to very good you could make $100/hour or north of it over a decent sample.

This is not including shots at 10/20 which of course would drive up/down the winrate depending on your skill level.

Most most of the winning live 5/10 regs play that safe style, because it translates to close to 6-figure income per year and if you factor in comps earned, etc etc then it's 6-figures if you put in enough hours every week every month 12 months a year. If you are playing this style and run bad for months you could move down to 2/5 where your skill level would allow you to make a relatively variance-free(for the winning 5/10 player) $30-40/hour until you build your roll/confidence back up to move back to 5/10.

The sickest winners at live 5/10, biggest winners, play the second, more LAGGY style I described... without proper BR management some of these talented players can go bust... but if they are emotionally equipped to handle the swings and constantly work on their game, think about alternate lines of every hand of note, be prepared to raise limpers or iso with hands as weak as 57s and ignore what your actual hand is or what the flop is but what your hand looks like to villain and put in big money if necessary to take down the pot whether you have it or no, think about how to beat each and every reg in the game, then usually they achieve a pretty sick winrate by being willing to play against anyone, prepared to bluff big, play shorthanded against anyone anytime to get the game going or keep it going... however most of the successful 5/10 live LAGs(not a huge number in the entire country) generally end up moving up... and eventually rarely play 5/10 as a grinder. Therefore most of the longterm winning regulars in the game end up being the same guys... who play Style #1. And of this group of course winrates can vary, some will be a little higher than $50-60/hour some a little lower but all of them have mostly a similar style and make enough to earn a decent living with the freedom of setting their own schedule. Style 2 though, involves quite a lot of stress because swings can be huge.. but you learn a lot more about yourself and opponents and improve more if you are able to withstand everything that comes with it...

This thread can end here. This post is perfectly accurate, concise, and complete. Well done. The competence, and experience of OP can be easily seen in this post by anyone who has been there, and done that.

Actually, no, it's not.

For one thing, $50/hour is a joke for a very solid winning player, even if they play low variance TAG. Assuming they're at least capable of anything, even if the vast majority of the time they're not spewing. "Capable Nit" is a term I've heard. Anyway, double that winrate. Almost all of the most consistent, biggest winners at Aria 5/10 are capable nits with one notable exception (the biggest winner plays loose).

Second, the VAST majority of the crazy LAGs either a) don't make nearly as much money as people think, or b) go bust. Some go on huge heaters and you go "wow, I wish I played like that, he's made 100 grand in the last six weeks" and then they go on a monster downswing and lose it all. I've seen it happen so many times. Just today I was playing 10/20 at Aria with someone who used to buy-in to Venetian 5/10 with 5-10 grand on a regular basis, and these days can frequently be found grinding $2-300 in a 2/5 or even 1/2 game. Today he presumably was taking a 10/20 shot because the game was incredible, and he min-bought and grinded a $600 stack for the first hour I was there before finding a double and snap leaving with his few hundred dollars profit. This is someone who used to play 25/50 HU online and played crazy LAG. Oops, busto.

Third, there's plenty of super solid but not crazy LAG players that are successful at huge stakes.

And finally, the biggest winner I've ever played with at 5/10 and 10/20 was by no means a crazy LAG. Perhaps he's a bit looser and more aggro than the "capable nits", but for the most part he just plays super solid, has incredible reading skills and picks his spots exceptionally well. He's now one of the most well-known names in poker, but he got his start grinding 5/10 and 10/20 at the Venetian a few years ago.