*** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances *** - Page 53 - Live Low-stakes No Limit Poker Forum - Live Poker Low-stakes NL

OneOut · 07-07-2011, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

Fun thread. I enjoyed reading through the debate back in April about whether it's possible to win more than $15/hr in $1/$2 NL, since I've been winning more than that and feel like a mediocre player myself.

Just to add to the data pool, results from this year's sessions, all playing $1/$2 NLHE, usually full ring, average session ~4 hours:

+237
+34
+343
+500
(-10)
+3
+240
+413
+350
+110
(-200)
+17
(-86)
+115
(-37)
(-200)
(-200)
(-24)
+128
+266
+182
+201
+210
+533
+2
(-200)
+243
(-200)
+9
(-95)
(-129)
(-100)
+120
+442

34 sessions (22 winning, 12 losing)

Total profit: $3217
Estimated hourly: $3217/136 = $23.65/hour (up $94.62 per session)

My goal for this year was to average $100/session. Last year my average profit was just over $57 per session and I played about 55 sessions. So, happily, it looks like I'm playing better this year.

Some people have a golf league or a bowling league where they go out once a week and pay $20-$40+ to have some fun. I have fun playing poker about once a week and I profit almost $100 (on average) each time. How cool is that?

It looks like you're only playing 1 bullet and then leaving. I assume you're not capping off when you get down a certain amount either. Is this correct?

Judging by the results though, it doesn't seem to be affecting your mindset or aggressiveness negatively. I can never play as confidently as I would like when I don't have at least 3 buy-ins with me.

What sometimes makes it even worse for me is that the nearest room is 1.5 hours from home so it screws with my mind sometimes when I think that if I play too loosely and aggressively and lose too much right away, I'll be stuck sitting there for several hours waiting for the bus home with nothing to do. So instead, I feel like I sit there and play too tight and bleed away almost half a stack every time before making anything. But maybe not because I can fold for a half hour, someone at the table can make a remark about it, and I'll still get a lot of action on raises and re-raises.

BAEVentures · 07-08-2011, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAEVentures

Locations for $1/2/5 and $2/5 were a mix of Harrah's St. Louis, once again when I still had some major leaks and minor tilt problems in my game. More recently the Horseshoe casino in Hammond, IN (10% up to $5 and $1 BBJ), Hollywood Casino in Aurora, IL (10% up to $8 and $1 BBJ), Grand Victoria Casino in Elgin, IL (10% up to $8, pre-flop rake as well, no BBJ). Lastly, Rockford Charitable Games and Chicago Charitable Games (10% up to $5, no BBJ).

49 sessions
330.5 hours played
$19,285 profit
$58.35 / hour
11.67 bb/hour
38.5 bb/100

I'll continue to give brief updates every 100 hours (once a month or so)

There are good reasons I play so many different locations, much has to do with the location of the charitable, the time of the day, the day of the week, certain casinos get games running on certain days that play better than others, etc.

Disclaimer: None of this information includes my travel expenses, time waiting for a table, travel time, food, beverages, etc. My profit stated is post tips/rake though obv. I tip $1 per winning hand in pots over $30, and $2 per winning hand in pots over $500.

As you can see I recently concluded close to a 10 buy-in downswing @ $2/5. The big upswing day was actually my first session of $5/10. Will break down stats between $5/10 and $2/5 once I get some more hours in @ $5/10.

chzbrglr · 07-09-2011, 07:43 AM

nice graph BAE, i need about 30 more hours to get to 200 and I will be posting my Poker Journal screenshots

msufan · 07-09-2011, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OneOut

It looks like you're only playing 1 bullet and then leaving. I assume you're not capping off when you get down a certain amount either. Is this correct?

I typically buy in for just $100, so those -$200 days are 2-buyin losses. I bring $300 with me but after losing two buyins I often decide to call it a night. I have bought in a third time in 2 sessions but have always gone up from there.

poke4fun · 07-09-2011, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

I typically buy in for just $100, so those -$200 days are 2-buyin losses. I bring $300 with me but after losing two buyins I often decide to call it a night. I have bought in a third time in 2 sessions but have always gone up from there.

Good discipline. I have been practicing the same. For the last 6 losing sessions, I only had 2 over 2 BI losses, one for 4 BI and the other for 2.5 BI.

Hanginout · 07-09-2011, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

I typically buy in for just $100, so those -$200 days are 2-buyin losses. I bring $300 with me but after losing two buyins I often decide to call it a night. I have bought in a third time in 2 sessions but have always gone up from there.

You should buy in for 100bbs at least. When switching over after black friday I was buying in 50bbs then switched to 100. You will be amazed at how much this increases your hourly.

At 30 hands/hr, missing an extra 30-40bbs or whatever cause you didn't cover your opponent is super costly. You can expect around 10bbs/hr if you are crushing. So you can see how costly it will be to your hrly by missing value cause of your stack.

It will most definitely be worth the little extra risk.

fullyfocused · 07-09-2011, 06:26 PM

[IMG]https://www.*************.com/pokergraphs/drawlineplot.php?y=total&category=Winnings&t=13102 49577&range=All+Time[/IMG]

Just started keeping track of my numbers. This is the last 6 weeks live in Vegas

poke4fun · 07-09-2011, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanginout

You should buy in for 100bbs at least. When switching over after black friday I was buying in 50bbs then switched to 100. You will be amazed at how much this increases your hourly.

At 30 hands/hr, missing an extra 30-40bbs or whatever cause you didn't cover your opponent is super costly. You can expect around 10bbs/hr if you are crushing. So you can see how costly it will be to your hrly by missing value cause of your stack.

It will most definitely be worth the little extra risk.

Chips are also worth a lot less when you're short-stack, especially if you're used to deep stack.

Both my calling and shoving range is probably 10 - 15% wider if I am short-stacked.

Shelldonahue · 07-09-2011, 08:13 PM

I am pretty sure this has been answered before, but I do not have the time to go through all 775 posts and check.

How much will not capping off your stack effect your winrate?

I know this may be a hard question to answer without any of my stats, but any answer will help.

Whenever I play I always buy in maximum which, in my case, is 66.67 BBs or $200. There are times when I go below $200. Sometimes its only a couple of dollars some times its to a point where I only have $40 left. I only bring 2 BIs with me since my BR is a little low (Just started playing live seriously). Whenever I get down below my original BI I do not like to cap it off. Is this going hurt my winrate in a big way?

msufan · 07-09-2011, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hanginout

You should buy in for 100bbs at least. When switching over after black friday I was buying in 50bbs then switched to 100. You will be amazed at how much this increases your hourly.

At 30 hands/hr, missing an extra 30-40bbs or whatever cause you didn't cover your opponent is super costly. You can expect around 10bbs/hr if you are crushing. So you can see how costly it will be to your hrly by missing value cause of your stack.

It will most definitely be worth the little extra risk.

There are two reasons I buy in for just $100.

1. Most of the bad players at the table have $100 or less. It's usually the good players (although sometimes also a bad player that doubled up) with more than that.

2. Buying in short allows me to do some things early that make me look looser than I really am. I swear, each night it seems like I follow the same pattern: get blinded down to around $90, pick up AKo, get like 5 other people who put $8-$10 out there, I shove all in, pick up $40-$50 for free, and then not only am I up to $130-$140, but also no one believes me later when I raise big with AA or KK.

I don't know -- it seems to work for me. I like the ability to start in a tight, attacking short-stack mode and then, as the night goes on and I (hopefully) get deeper stacked, switch into a different game where set-mining and limping in with suited connectors can be profitable.

Hanginout · 07-10-2011, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

There are two reasons I buy in for just $100.

1. Most of the bad players at the table have $100 or less. It's usually the good players (although sometimes also a bad player that doubled up) with more than that.

2. Buying in short allows me to do some things early that make me look looser than I really am. I swear, each night it seems like I follow the same pattern: get blinded down to around $90, pick up AKo, get like 5 other people who put $8-$10 out there, I shove all in, pick up $40-$50 for free, and then not only am I up to $130-$140, but also no one believes me later when I raise big with AA or KK.

I don't know -- it seems to work for me. I like the ability to start in a tight, attacking short-stack mode and then, as the night goes on and I (hopefully) get deeper stacked, switch into a different game where set-mining and limping in with suited connectors can be profitable.

Say one bad player buys $100 n wins a few pots while you lose a few, n now stacks are $90 to $140. Not playing a bigger stack cost you $50. That's 2.5 extra hrs of work at ~10bbs/hr.

I would be very cognizant of the stack sizes of your targets and be sure to always cover them. Even if you are scared to play full stacked against regs.

Even if only a few bad players at the table have more than you. If this happens once per session, it's murdering your winrate, and extending your session by 2.5 hrs to make the same money.

Looking at your winnings, you shouldn't have a problem financially. Start bringin 2, $200 bullets to the casino. A 100bb stack plays waaaaaaay longer than a 50bb so these two bullets will actually be better than your previous 3 ($100) bullets.

I always buyin $200 and cap off when I get down to $120ish and rarely rarely in a game for over $400.

72winner · 07-10-2011, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msufan

There are two reasons I buy in for just $100.

1. Most of the bad players at the table have $100 or less. It's usually the good players (although sometimes also a bad player that doubled up) with more than that.

2. Buying in short allows me to do some things early that make me look looser than I really am. I swear, each night it seems like I follow the same pattern: get blinded down to around $90, pick up AKo, get like 5 other people who put $8-$10 out there, I shove all in, pick up $40-$50 for free, and then not only am I up to $130-$140, but also no one believes me later when I raise big with AA or KK.

I don't know -- it seems to work for me. I like the ability to start in a tight, attacking short-stack mode and then, as the night goes on and I (hopefully) get deeper stacked, switch into a different game where set-mining and limping in with suited connectors can be profitable.

^^^^ yes!!!!

Folks under-value that "meta game". Fish don't notice that you change your game when you move from 50bb to 200bb.

Critique is good, but my guess is your win rate is not better than his...

I think he knows what he's doing.

BTW I'm in awe of your discipline. $200 for the night is a great way to do it.

I have nights where I'm in $1000 at 1/2 and 2/5. I usually end up with a win but a lot of risk. I should look at trying what you do.

It's 3 hrs+ driving to get to casino and back so I really hate to leave though...

72winner · 07-10-2011, 02:32 PM

The other thing you can do is buy in for $100 but then rebuy for more.

It actually works well as folks think you're just tilted...

Whereas if you buy in full-stack at first they think you're serious and watch out for you more.

msufan · 07-10-2011, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 72winner

^^^^ yes!!!!

Folks under-value that "meta game". Fish don't notice that you change your game when you move from 50bb to 200bb.

Critique is good, but my guess is your win rate is not better than his...

I think he knows what he's doing.

BTW I'm in awe of your discipline. $200 for the night is a great way to do it.

I have nights where I'm in $1000 at 1/2 and 2/5. I usually end up with a win but a lot of risk. I should look at trying what you do.

It's 3 hrs+ driving to get to casino and back so I really hate to leave though...

It helps that my drive is about 10 minutes, yeah.

GooseATTACK · 07-11-2011, 01:30 PM

I'm a newb when it comes to live poker and have only been playing for about two months (played home games and internet for a while). I've been playing about 40 hours a week and so far these are my winrates

1/2-$22.50/hr
2/5-$40/hr(only have about 40-50 hours here)

I know these are not a large sample sizes so what I wanted to know is whether these win rates are sustainable or should i lower my standards as I keep playing. I'm a college student, and the amount I'm making right now is real good, but i don't want to get accustomed to these amounts if their not attainable in the long run