Just curios what a good profitable 8/16 player makes hourly... I'm sure there's no wrong or right answer, just want to get some ideas..

It's hard to make a profit that covers your expenses. Prior to the recent rake increase, the last time I checked I made about $14 an hour playing 8/16, and I think that's honestly at the very top of the curve at that limit. The rake increase should cut about $3 an hour out of a winrate, so I'd say now that $11 is the upper limit.

You definitely need to be playing at least 15/30 or 20/40 to cover expenses and make any sort of "a living".

Recent rake increase ?? When did this happen. Is this just a specific state or casino ? Sorry have not played in a while

California. They are now taking $7 in Southern California cardrooms. Other cardrooms may be taking a bit less, but everyone went up $1.

It depends on were you play and how good the games are. I play mostly 20/40 now but sometimes still play 8/16 while I wait. If your a good solid player, 16/hr is doable. If your very good you could make 20/ hr. I made a ton of mistakes back then and have evolved as a player so I think these numbers could be even higher with a better skill set. The games seem to be just as good as they used to be although sometimes there aren't as many tables running as in the past.

I pulled about 14.75/hr over the last 1000+ hours. The last 500 of those is closer to 13.50/hour.

So Im guessing 1BB per hour would be considered pretty good for this game.. Hmm $16 per hour is not gonna cut it for me lol

Yeah, 40+ bets per 100 hands leaving the table is tough to overcome for a big total. That's effectively 4 BB/100 out of your stack.

4/8 is pretty much considered the edge of profitability, and w/ a $5 rake at FW for example w/ different rake points, that's around $450/100 hands off the table. Or around 56 bets. Since you'd be playing tighter, that might equate to 5 BB/100 leaving your stack. So an $8/$16 w/ $7 rake isn't going to be much better.

I don't have enough of a sample size to be sure. However, based on what I have seen at Hollywood Park and Hustler I believe higher win rates are possible if you are smart about when and where you play. The 8/16 and Hollywood Park in particular is often a very good game (5-6 players seeing most flops, lots of cold calling raises and lots of calling down.)

While it is possible to make living expenses lower, I'll say that you shouldn't consider going pro until you can beat 40/80. Part of the reason is what you're saying about $10-$16/hour not cutting it. You go on a losing streak at the 40, you move down to the 20, save your roll a bit, and recover. There's some chance to recover as a 40 pro. As a 20 pro, you go on a losing streak and generally lack that option -- you can't make rent after you move down.

That said, I'd guess it is a good limit to learn poker, still turn a profit, and not really run into that many people good enough to make a living at cards.

Thus, you shouldn't go pro at the lowest limit you need to cover expenses, unless your other life options are terrible.

In the month I have been playing 8/16 I have discovered it to be good for all of the things DougL said. I would say that it has also been a nice boost to my income but I have been saving all of my winnings to build a bigger bankroll.

When I played full time in the past the lowest level I played was 20/40 at Commerce and 25/50 at Hustler (talk about a weird limit.)

Just to be fair, it is totally OK for poker to be a fun hobby. I'm riding a $2k road bike, and I probably go through $500-$1000 a year in gear and sports snacks a year. Let's say I'm paying $4/hr to $10/hr to ride a stupid bike. Jram78911 goes to the casino and only makes $13/hour playing 8/16 LHE. He's looking $20/hour ahead of me as far as hobbies. When he said "worth it" many of us think pro poker. Heck a hobby that costs $0/hour in the long run crushes most anything else.

Don't let the search for cash ruin a fun activity. Most of us will never be poker pros.

DougL - you are definitely right about all of that. When I first started playing I was thrilled that I could go to AC for the weekend and come out even or slightly ahead after hotel rooms, food, and some entertainment.

It wasn't until I started playing full time in 2006 that my outlook changed and it became a total search for cash. Now I treat it as something between a hobby and a second job that I really, really, like. When I played for a living I did pretty well but found the stress to suck the joy out of it. Now I get the best of both worlds and would advise most people who even could be poker pros that it is, all things being equal, a superior path.

25/50 at Hustler is the nuts.

It is much like fight club.

I quite simply cannot wait to get back into that game. I made an obscene amount in it in 2006-2007.
I don't have the bankroll to play in it comfortably right now (didn't then either.) But am looking forward to getting into it early next year.

What I heard was

Honestly, if you have a decent job, the best way to build a bankroll is by saving it.

You can go crank out 1,000 hours of 8/16 for a 300 BB 25/50 bankroll. Or you can put in 500 extra hours at the office, get a promotion and an oversized year-end bonus, and pick up $15,000 extra dollars that way.

Most of the time, people are skill-limited, not bankroll-limited. Games now are significantly tougher than in 2006-2007. I'd be more worried that a winning strategy back then is going to be moderately fishy now.

The nice thing about being a winning player over some decent amount of hours is that you feel better going to the bank and asking for a stack of fun tickets. Not being able (willing?) to build $ online anymore, it is a leap of faith to grab a couple 30/60 buyins and heading over to the casino. Agree in the long run that strictly building your roll at the tables might not be worth it, but walking through the doors at the local joint and know that you're at least as good as anyone playing at 8/16 and having played some hours with plenty of 20/40 players is priceless. Answering that skill question at the tables helps the mental game.

Still, playing 4/8 for $6/hour or even 8/16 for $15/hour might be a terrible job. That $10k check for a great review could go for a chunk of a sports car or your 20/40 shot. Choose wisely. Even better head to the leo doc wine thread and life-win.

Can I quote this post when I crush my next presentation to explain how professionals should be compensated?

Exactly how many people work in an office, can put in whatever extra hours they want, have promotional opportunities available, and have the possibility of getting a bonus? My guess would be less than 1% of US population, so kinda silly to even mention any of this. Even most people I have met in my life who have good jobs live paycheck to paycheck and car barely pay their regular bills on time, much less be able to save any.

I pretty much disagree with everything.

First of all, people who work hourly have more flexibility to pick up hours. People on salary don't get paid overtime or get credit for working late.

Secondly, the vast majority of people have a path to promotion. That isn't to say most are promotable or will be promoted. It's no different than saying "20/40 can be beaten." Not everyone will beat 20/40, but most people could if they put in the time and effort.

Third, I agree that most people do live paycheck to paycheck. That doesn't mean they need to, or that they should. I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area at the height of the tech boom on $15,000 gross. I made ends meet (shared apartment, no car, no TV, bought my bed at a garage sale which in retrospect was not a great life choice, etc.) and had enough to live and save to put in tech stocks (some if which I still own). When people aren't saving, it's rarely a physical, "I literally can't" thing, but a psychological, "But I need the new iPhone" thing (more on this later). The vast majority of people could save if they wanted to.

Finally, all the crying about not having time or money is made moot by the fact that in the context of poker, you self-select for having time and money simply by showing up to the cardroom. It's not a question of "should I buy food for my children or save for 20/40," it's "if I want to play 20/40, am I better off spending time and money playing 8/16 or spending time and money elsewhere?"

Grinding 8/16 or below is a terrible way to make money. You do better begging for change at an intersection ($10+/hr with small variance) and much better getting a janitorial job ($10-$15/hr with no variance).

So if you feel like your game needs work and you need to be at the tables working on it, great. But if you're there because you have the skills but not the money, you are literally wasting your life.

You have a limited amount of time to do everything you want to do in life. Unless you want a bunch of deathbed regrets, you should strategize to do them as fast as you can. Want to move up to 100/200, win enough money to open a strip club, and party for the rest of your life? Every hour you're grinding 8/16 is one less hour to do lines off of a stripper's butt.

Calli - interesting read on things. I tend to agree with you on the paycheck to paycheck thing and disagree on a lot of the other stuff. There are a number of reasons why that I will try to break down here.

1.) I think you are definitely underrating the ability of a winning player to earn at 8/16. Beyond that though the quality of life loss from begging or working a manual labor job definitely means 8/16 is the better choice. Especially as a 'second job.'

2.) I don't know what the breakdown of salary to wages are for people who are both skilled enough to player higher limits and working full time job. But in my case I am both salaried and not in a position where putting in more hours at work will lead to a promotion. I am not quite paycheck to paycheck but it would take quite a while to save up enough to play 25/50 or 40/80 without additional income.

That leads to the only real question I have considered regarding the use of money for poker and that is would it be better used to pay down debt. There is a strong consideration there as I do carry a few thousand dollars in credit card debt that I am paying down slower than I would like. However, the loss of my poker roll to pay it down would cost me, I am guessing, about $2500 in income over the next three months while I rebuild to the point that I can play again - the interest on my debt during those months would not add up to that much, and even if it did the loss of time at the tables would be hard to justify.

* This all assumes that my estimations for potential winrate at 8/16 are closer to correct than what has been discussed here.

Absolutely. Everyone needs a job where the Bonus Fairy stops by with the odd $500-$5k attaboy. If the job market tightens up a little more in the tech world, we can see the return of the $5k-$10k refer-a-friend bonuses. The whole S2000 adventure in my life started with a signing bonus plus two friend referrals. Good times, indeed. Sure wish I had used that money as a down payment on a rental house. Still, exceedingly fun car. While dollars and sense wise it was a terrible decision, maybe once in your life you should own a truly great car.
Of the people who can afford to play mid-stakes and post on this board? Maybe half. A good half of the rest can basically afford to play any limit spread in the US out of discretionary income. Maybe your 1% estimate is correct, however, out of people gambling for decent money you have a biased sample.

Honestly, if you are living paycheck to paycheck and money is a huge issue, gambling generally is a terrible idea. Given the rake structures in most of the country, I'd recommend that anyone starting out do basically anything else. The old days where we played with $3 rake, started out at 4/8, and did the grind a BR thing are gone. Telling people in a live poker venue to start out at limits they can afford to lose at, get better, and then use real-life money to move up if they haven't earned a whole 20/40 BR is pretty reasonable.

You said it better than I did.

Or do stuff in the way you enjoy. We had this one old guy in our small/mid-stakes home game that started showing up with O2. One of the doctors in the game was amazed at how much he needed. Turns out the last time he came, he was literally on his deathbed and checked himself out of the hospital to make the game. Poker was his last competitive outlet as his body failed. He was happy to risk his life by leaving the hospital, because he was going to do something he enjoyed. I saw his wife not long after the funeral, and she was super happy she drove him to the game that night. Something about being better than being in bed waiting to die. I totally respect him for living the life he wanted, as best he could.

I just don't get who Callipygian's advice is suited for. If someone has the opportunity, ability to make extra money at a job they don't dislike, they are probably already doing so. Even if they are not, the reason they are reading this board and thinking about playing a lot of 8/16 is because they enjoy playing poker. It seems silly to tell them to, instead of playing 8/16 part time for the next year, put in extra hours at a job just so they can later play higher for recreation.

If they play 8/16 part time for the next year instead, they will be doing something they presumably enjoy, and hopefully making some money. They will also be improving their ability to beat a bigger game more than they would by working a regular job. And anyway, if someone wants to play recreationally, they are probably better off playing 8/16 or lower anyway. I certainly have found that they higher I pay the more money I make, but the less "fun" it is.

Finally, if his advice is meant for someone who is looking to play professionally....well, if someone already has a good-paying job they don't dislike, better advice would just be to keep your job.