Doug, how many tables would one have to play to be a $30-$40/hour winner? My guess would be around 15, if so how many monitors does that equate to?

If you don't believe Doug, then here's my personal experience: I think the estimation of 10x is actually too low. I've also played 2/4-4/8 for 8 years - the comparable stakes I've found online are 2c/4c. I'm currently a 6/12 live player, and online, 5c/10c is close.

I'm not a good player by any stretch of the imagination, but I've directly played the stakes you've played and the stakes you want to play, and I'll say that you're in for a very rude surprise if you ignore Doug.

This is what I would suggest to you: deposit $10 into a site. Start with 5c/10c and move up every time you hit 100 BB for the next level. If it's really as easy as you think it is, you should be up to $400 (100 BB for 2/4) in no time. If you find it difficult to move up, then come back and maybe you'll appreciate what Doug and others are saying.

I was thinking 6-8 tabling 2/4 at near 1BB/100. Add in some rakeback or playing Platinum on PS, and I think this hourly is quite doable. With 2 24" monitors you could have full size tables. If you stack or are willing to shrink a little, 8 tabling on one monitor is quite normal. TBH, 2/4 FR isn't going to require detailed reads to beat for a decent player; these days being a decent LHE player is quite an accomplishment. There is a lot to it, and the games aren't getting any easier.

For an example, I was 7 tabling 3/6 and 5/T FR today. I had 3 5/T tables on my big monitor and a stack of 3 3/6 tables. These were all full sized (default). I also had a 5/T table on the LCD of my laptop. I could keep detailed notes and watch all the action in the 5/T games. I could take notes on the 3/6 games, unless things were hopping. If I were BBB or another pro, I'd probably have added 3-4 more games... In the end, you're trading off rackback for win rate; I'm trying to pay attention more in the 5/T games to help stave off some RoR issues. Given some practice, you won't even feel time crunched doing this; there are plenty of people better than me doing this.

One more thing - for the microstakes that these guys are talking about you're probably best off playing on Full Tilt. DO NOT sign up for an account unless you do it through a rakeback provider.

What this means is that you will get back a portion of the rake that the site takes from the pots you win. 30% of the rake returned to you may not sound like much, but it does add up and once you start playing a little higher the sums can be significant. If you don't sign up through a rakeback affiliate then you never again will get the chance to get rakeback unless you win the WSOP or something.

I personally have never played on Full Tilt, but the word around twoplustwo is that it is superior for beginning players because you can get more rakeback than you can get from Pokerstars.

There is an "affiliates/rakeback" forum here (under Internet Poker) that should have more info on rakeback.

Pokerstars has a different rakeback scheme that doesn't require you to sign up a certain way, but again, as a microstakes player, you're probably better off on Full Tilt.

After reading this thread, I am very tempted to take my 1400 cash stack (not touching online bankroll) and take a shot at 10/20 live.
Not trying to be a pro, just wondering if I should test myself.

online players are much better and the games are harder. an online 2/4 game will play something like a live 20/40 or 40/80 game. a live 2/4 game will play something like .10/.20 online. i don't want you to get crushed online as you start out! obviously the dollars are the same

Just wondering if I can get any advise on table selection for LHE.
When you guys select tables, what do you look for? I have a list of weak players that I track, I look at the pot size and from time to time at % to see the flop.
Any other advise?

These discussions are sometime silly, as obviously live games differ from place to place. My experience, however, is that good live games are substantial easier than games played for 1/10th the stakes online. On a random day if you challenged me to win money over 500 hands in either my local 30/60 or an online 3/6 game, I'd take the 30/60 every time.

online games vary too

let's just agree to the 10x figure

gg

Thanks BBB. It's not that I don't believe what is being said, I just truly didn't know. Appreciate the advice and I will do some research!

Thanks for the tip. I'm not that green, to not realize how significant a 30% savings on a rake woould be. That's Great!

This comes down to what your cash stack is worth to you.

If you lose your $1400 and you never get to play poker again ever in your life, I wouldn't recommend it. If you lose your $1400 but you're making $100/day from online play which you don't need for anything else in life, absolutely go for it.

Also, you probably don't need $1400 for a single shot at 10/20. $500 is probably sufficient, leave if you get shellacked rather than sinking in another buyin. I did this in Vegas this past summer and had a blast - two deepstacked ******s basically vomited $3,000 onto the table and I was lucky enough to pick up almost a quarter of it.

Mathematically, a monumental downswing is inevitable if you play long enough.

One in ten people with 100,000 hand histories (which I'm sure you can find all over this board) will have seen a one-in-a-million scenario.

Annoying Noob Post Alert

I'm starting to learn limit hold'em (again I guess) by playing full ring.

Obviously the landscape of limit hold'em has changed since the glory days of Party Poker etc.

The question I'd like to ask is..

#1. Is it still possible to make over 1bb/100 at 2/4 and 3/6 if your half decent? assuming full ring here

I remember back in the day if you showed up with two feet and a heart beat this was pretty achievable..

SSHE by Miller was pretty much the bible, is there any new text that has taken over?

Thanks,

amv

Half decent ... probably not going to make more than 1 BB / 100. Another poster recently said something like - there are people making a living playing 3/6 and 5/T on line poker these days. Those are the people you'll be playing against. Many people playing 2/4 are aspiring to play 3/6 (this is me - I just graduated to 2/4). You're trying to muscle in on their living. Do you think it may be tough?

SSHE is still the bible as far as I know. But there are some other books that are specifically geared to online poker. I haven't read any of them. May be somebody else can recommend for both of us.

Welcome and don't worry about being "annoying," we've all been there.

Live or online?

Live 3/6 should be beatable for 1 BB/hr (~3 BB/100) depending on the rake; live 2/4 is difficult because of the rake.

Online 3/6 and 2/4 are much tougher than live 3/6 and 2/4, but I wouldn't be surprised if some people on this forum could win 1 BB/100.

No, but online 2/4-3/6 probably aren't the games described by SSHE. SSHE describes the microstakes online games (2c/4c-25c/50c) and small stakes live games (1/2-10/20).

(1) Welcome to the forums; it looks like you're new to poker as well so welcome to LHE.

(2) Most statistics aren't measured in $/hr, they're measured in BB/hr (big bets per hour) for live games, and BB/100 hands for online games.

(3) The general rule of thumb is that +1 BB/hr is a good live goal, and +1 BB/100 is a good online goal. Don't try mixing the units (calculating BB/100 for live or BB/hr for online), as the two games are not comparable. Online plays a lot faster than live and you can multitable, but live players are worse than online players at the same stakes.

(4) Assuming $7.58/hr is mixed between 2/4 (1 BB = 4) and 3/6 (1 BB = 6), you're averaging about +1.5 BB/hr. This is good, and contrary to what mntndrew says, I think this is sustainable since rake in Vegas is low. However, you're going to need a lot more than 78 hours of play to nail that number down for sure. What you can say with some confidence is that you're a winner; whether that's +0.5 BB/hr or +1.5 BB/hr or +2.5 BB/hr can't be determined with that small of a sample size.

(5) You should keep playing more, both to gain experience and also to build your bankroll. Your goal should be to build up a bankroll to move up in stakes - you have a lot of good games available to you (Bellagio, Venetian, Wynn run 4/8, Mirage runs 6/12 sometimes, Venetian runs 8/16, Mirage and Wynn run 10/20 sometimes).

(6) Keep very detailed records.
- Location
- Day and time
- How long you played
- How much you won or lost
- Jot down any hands which confused you or stumped you (post them here for advice)

So, a brief history. Back in the good old days (2005-2007), I was a successful online limit hold'em player. I was 4 tabling 5/10 6 max on party and making a decent (~2.3 BB/100) profit. Due to Party Blackjack, a few trips to vegas, and eventually moving, my poker career came to a halt. I currently have zero money on any sites. So, I am looking to take advantage of a deposit bonus or two and rebuild my bankroll. I will probably come back at a micro level (1/2 full on Poker Stars) and use the bonus to build up my BR.

Two questions:

#1. What software should i be using (before I used Poker Tracker combined with a HUD of some sort to track players) What is available now? Is PokerTracker still the bees knees and such?
#2. Are low limit tables still profitable?

Thanks in advance

#1 Poker Tracker or Holdem Manager will both serve you well
#2 Yes, very, though you will likely find you have to do a bit of work to catch up to the state of the games at the moment.

Just to add something you might be already aware of, every one here will recommend that you have a look around for rake back deals. Because at the limits you play, you can get quite a bit of money in the form of RB.

charity poker in cleveland has a 5/10 LHE game with a $15/hr time charge.

note:

1) no tipping allowed
2) electronic shufflers.

beatable?

If it has a typical 5/10 line-up, then I'd say yeah.

IIRC the 4/8 I play has $4+$1 drop and $1 tip per hand. At 35hand/hr that's $210/hr the table is paying for drop/tips. Your table is paying $15x9=$135/hr in drop/tips. Now on our table you'll be paying less than 1/9 of the $210 because you will be winning fewer pots than the fish. People beat our 4/8 game. I think your game is beatable.

The search function is your friend...

And yes, it's a nice 5/T lineup, IMO.

I'd say it's beatable provided the table is like most loose 5/10 tables.

$15 per hour x 10 people = $150 removed from the table per hour.

Compare to ($4 rake + $1 jackpot + $1 tip) x 30 hands/hour = $180 removed from the table per hour and you may wind up doing better at this timed game than most "standardly" raked games.

You can also afford to loosen up a bit more since playing a loose style and dragging more pots won't punish you the same way a raked game would.