I don't get it? Why is that hard to beleive? Also I said most people are not doing it. I didn't say no one can do it. Just face facts. Most players online are rakcback players. No big deal, it's just what it is.

Because hu winrates can be huge, the edges of some of the regs vs other regs even at 10knl can be well over 10-15bb/100 but with all your hu experience, and the 7 years you've been a member here, you think that 4bb/100 is impossible. You are either lying, trolling, or incredibly dense in the face of 4 identical threads telling you the same thing which you constantly refuse to believe.

You play half a million hands of hu in a year and also say that no one plays more than 1000 hands a day.

I had been a member for 7 years never looked at the site until 2 months ago. Kinda wish I didn't either. Not something I spent time on. I guess now I know why.

When did I say that? I was just using 1,000 hands a day as a meter. Then all u guys say "they" play more then 1,000 hands a day. Ok who are they? And really don't answer. Honestly I don't care. Grind out your rakeback then tell people u win at poker. Gl all.

Plo heads up challenge still exists if anyone is interested.

Ffs man your questions were answered like 30 times in the thread and no one really disagreed with you about the differences in live vs online in terms of winrate or hourly and yet you keep asking the same questions. It's life tilting. There are various reasons that people play online and they can make just as good of living as people playing live at moderately higher stakes. It doesn't matter if some of their income is through rakeback or not.

fyp

this is just ******ed, i already pointed out many regs play several thousand hands a day, so if you have a reg grinding out 4k hands a day with that winrate he makes 80$/day from playing a game at his home

right, all the top hyper sng guys who make several sne a year with 0.25 ROI are not actually winning money playing poker? please tell us more

Hypothetical:

1/2 live winrate = 30 big blinds per 100 hands
25NL online winrate = 6 big blinds per 100 hands

1/2 live plays 25 hands per hour
25NL online plays 800 hands per hour

1/2 live = $15 per hour
25NL online = $12 per hour

After rakeback, probably pretty close to even. Need less money to play 25NL online. Don't need to travel to a casino to play 25NL online (time+gas). Will play many more hands so not as subject to variance in a given time frame (this probably was not the right way to phrase this but I think it gets my intended meaning across). Etc.

BTW it is probably possible to make more than that at both 1/2 live and 25NL online.

If the assumption is 4bb per 100 hands at 50NL, then yes that is $2 per 100 hands.

Say 800 hands per hour.

So $16 per hour. Add rakeback and it should be somewhat over $20 per hour.


Well, first of all $2 per 100 hands would $20 in 1000 hands, not $10. Second of all I would not say that winning at 4 big blinds per 100 hands at 50Nl is "killing it".

But, yea, 1000 hands is maybe something like one hour and 15 minutes for someone playing 7 to 10 tables. One might be able to play a bit longer than that. So, 7 hours a day, this would be approximately 112$ per day. Plus rakeback. Call that $8 per hour. So $168 per day. 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year = $40,320 per year playing only 1680 hours per year with no commuting time nor commuting expenses.


This example is kinda stupid since you are comparing someone playing about 400 hours a year to someone playing 2000 hours a year.

Based on what I've read in other threads op thinks that people feel online players are better because they win equivalent or more money than live players at slightly higher stakes.

So his argument is 'lol nuh uh bc online players earn rakeback and don't win real monies from playing and I've seen online players play trash hands that no live pro would play.'

Rakeback isn't actually profit though, right? It's just a discount on rake. He's acting like the sites are paying people to play and they're just break-even otherwise.

Rakeback is profit or at the very least income just like tax breaks/refunds.

I agree with your conclusion on jungmit's claims tho.

after the other day where he kept insisting on the same question over and over after multiple people had already answered him I became curious about our friend. turns out he's just a rig-tard in hiding.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...71/index2.html

semi good news, though. if you play PLO you might be able to get some cheezeburger stakes HU action with a side bet!

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/17...ay-me-1484255/

Ok that makes some sense. The problem is if u are playing25nl ad playing 12 tables to get your 800 hands per hour, u need like more money then 1 buy in at 1-2. So if u play that many tables u still need same money. No?

Ok so no one wants to play me heads up at plo? Why not take a chance.
So u play the easier game?? Hold em? Ok what stakes u play? Maybe we can work something out there? Let me know. I will play almost any game head up.

Ok u play he easier game? Hold em? What stakes u play at and on what site? Maybe we can work out something? I will play almost any game heads up. Let me know

More money in terms of buyins for bankroll management.

Multi-tabling does not increase your bankroll management requirements.

Why did I just read this thread
OP is either a bad troll or a complete idiot, or both

You need more money than 1 buy-in at 1-2 live to play 1-2 live also.


I'm not gonna bother looking for the pzhon formula and going through it to explain it to you. But just figure 25 buyins (and even add 7 buy-ins just to have extra for multitabling even though this is probably not that necessary):

1-2 live ----> Need $5,000

25NL -------> Need $800

I'll play you Holdem HU. I live in NJ. If you can play on those sites it would be convenient. If not maybe we could work it out on some other site. But I'm not going to bother depositing on one of those sites unless we both escrow some money and agree on a minimum number of hands to be played. I won't do this for below 2/4NL (400NL).