Imo it's by moving up that you'll be learning a lot faster - and probably learn it the hard way.

I mean you're never going to learn how to play competent regs by playing 10NL since there is just no good reg at that limit.

Here's my graph, only 20K hands, but i'm (probably) about to move up within this week.



It all depends on how you feel it. If you play scared money just drop back, but I mean there's no reason to lose at 50NL if you consistently won @ 25NL.


I really feel like 5ptbb/100 is achievable at 25NL. I'm running like 2 buy-ins over EV in that sample so it's about my winrate. Probably didn't run too bad though, but it's not like I feel i'm a world class player.


But I don't think you can sustain winning 1 BI / hour at 25NL or 50NL unless you're really one of the best of the limit AND you 16+ table. At least it's not "standard" like someone said.

Fwiw that's 5.5ptbb/100 8 tabling which is about 15$ / hour with rakeback.

understanding ranges > level 3 thinking

Don't spend too much time at a lower level if you have the roll. NL100 isn't too different from NL50.

Yeah but the problem is I've seen my winrate drop significantly as I move up. It was 11ptbb/100 at 2nl, 5ptbb/100 at 5nl, 4ptbb/100 at 10nl and so far it's 3ptbb+/100 at 25nl (super small sample size). I don't wanna end up getting a crappy wr of 1ptbb/100 at 50nl.

I figured that if I could beat 25nl for 6ptbb/100 I'd be able to beat 50nl for at least 3ptbb/100.

There is no theoretical ideal winrate, but 100bb/hand at 1000NL comes pretty damned close to it

I 18-20 tabled 25NL a lot recently and beat it for almost 7pt over 50k, but i heavily doubt it's sutainable:

Look at it this way: At NL2 you made $.44/100 hands, $.50 at NL5 , $.80 at NL10, and $1.50 at NL25. Looks like progress to me. People usually say that you can at least maintain your absolute winnings per hand when moving up. So if you could make more than 1.5ptbb/100 at NL50 you'd make more than you currently do at NL25.

Another point is that playing higher challenges you more and forces you to play better. So in order to reach your goal of making 3ptbb at 50 it makes more sense to me to actually play there, rather than play lower and strive for a high winrate.

Some words about my background might help: I used to play up to NL50 last year but had to use my bankroll for other means. I started over at NL2 but struggled at NL5. When my roll allowed for it (and Stars introduced deep tables) I took a shot at NL10, ran hotter than the sun, and made 20BI in 13 days. I realize that this is not sustainable, but I moved up to NL25. I found that the games are more challenging, but there's still money to be made, and I'm up over a small sample.

I guess it depends on your goals. If you want to make money now and need to withdraw regularly, then maybe you should play the stakes you know you can beat. If you want to move up quickly and you're not depending on poker as a source of income then aggressive shots are in order. My goal is to reach at least NL100 as quickly as possible.

Kurt has written a nice COTW on the subject.

Nice graph!

But why think that you can hold 7pt winrate?

Not sure what you mean with your question...?

I think it's not sustainable just because it feels like I'm running hot, hitting hands in good spots and stuff. I've ran a little over 4 pt over my lifetime 250k sample (tho the first 150k I was a 15/7 and weak/tight with a ton of leaks more than a year ago, but games were easier also and i didn't play 18 tables but like 10/12). 18/20 tabling and somewhere between 5/6 pt is only for the very best sustainable (and from what I know from your game, you get pretty damned close to that). However, if you play only 8 tables or less, i definitly think very good players can sustain 7pt+ at 25NL, not only because you have more time per descision, but the 8 juiciest tables at 25NL at any given time are extremely soft.

how do you cope with 20 tables? robotic decisions?

Tons of people can 20 table. I do 12-16 while watching the simpsons. And.. it doesn't have to be robotic.

Sry for bad question, but you mentioned right things. I am playing little bit less tables than you (15,16), but my winrate is pretty close to 7ptbb after more than 350k hands. Probably games are little bit harder, but good player with some discipline can achieve 7pt winrate even when playing 12+ tables.

nono, you don't see it, do you? YOU are very good. Pretty much top-notch what one can achieve at 25NL. In fact, from what I've seen at 25NL this past month, you were prolly the best reg at stars in your 25NL days. I'm also pretty sure that at ptr, you are going to be the benchmark for the grading software

TJ is better.

Damn it, quit teasing. Show us the graph! 7ptbb/100 over 350k hands is NUTS.

like how? my concentration goes off beyond 6 tables