???????

Wtf is your point

Agreed!

I generally find walking into a reg heavy weeknight game as a 'travelling businessman unknown' the most profitable thing is try to show down as few hands as possible in the first 60-90 minutes and play nitty or aggro based on the table dynamics and cards I'm getting dealt. Then the first couple of hands I show down, immediately switch gears and play the opposite strategy.

For example if I seem to nit it up for first hour due to being card dead, I'll wait until first really strong hand, play it super ABC and show it whether called or not like a donk rec player. Then rapidly switch to playing a much more laggy style and staying with that until the table starts to catch on (or I'm forced to show cards that go against the story from the first hour).

Normally in a typical 3-4 hour session just switching gears like this once/maybe twice based on what cards get shown seems extremely profitable as most of the regs assume once they see my perceived style that I'll stay with that. This obviously work for one or two sessions based on table church. But since my average is one 4 hour session at a casino it seems to be super profitable...

+1

Lol at 5-7bb/hr being "average."

Most 2p2ers are not winning players (after rake) imo.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Avaritia - 250 is my longest...I have had multiple b/e stretches in the 200 range

I also agree with your sentiments. Winning 10 bb/hr is not something you roll into the casino and do. I have and extensive online experience with a massive database. This crutch really helped me to understand the importance of position and other critical factors that most live only players miss (thus causing some pretty big leaks in their games).

As I have said countless times self awareness, ego, control, etc are also something that are very important. I have a huge edge on these. Not b/c I'm totally ossum or anything. But prior to poker I played a SHT load of high stakes advantage BJ. That game is in fact robotic. Yes I would get irritated when I lose but my decisions were binary. My decision tree was a rote laid out map. I am convince this has really enabled me to be able to not tilt (or if I feel it coming on I can see it and leave)

Lastly my gamboolin buddies are some of the smartest people I know. They are former high profile wall street lawyers, professors, computer programmers - that have great minds for this type of analysis.

All of these factors have led to a nice confluence of events for my "success" in llnlh

I put success in quotes b/c honestly who really gives a rats ass is some dude wins a whopping 50 bux per hour at a card game in a room full of miserable people.

I would much rather share the beauty of hanggliding with you guys and take you all for tandem rides

For those that dont know me I have been an avid outdoorsman my whole life and flying hanggliders is my passion. I have been a tandem instructor for years and recently got all of my certifications reinstated. I give rides at my pals place called wallaby ranch

www.wallaby.com check it out

+1

Whats that cost Squid? I may come see you next time I get up to Orlando area.

discovery flights are 175$

Includes an amazing breakfast after. If you dont want to fly thats totally cool. At least stop by and have coffee and a free breakfast...and see what hanggliding is all about!!

What were your conclusions?

I'm still not convinced such a small sample size tells us much, unless we really start grouping hands/positions together. At the 2000 mark, I thought to myself "damn, I wish I had been tracking all my hands by position, I would have an stone cold proof database of profitable vs unprofitable hands by now". But then I worked backwards, and long story short, realized the profitability of playing 55 UTG would have boiled down to how I did when I flopped a set ~4 times (really, I'm going to conclude anything from what happened on 4 hands?!?!).

Gnotconvincedittellsusallthatmuchotherthanperhapst heobviousG

Awesome, and thanks for posting Squiddy. As far as I can recall (I wish there was an easier way of parsing information in this thread), these are likely the biggest numbers over the largest sample size we've seen posted so far in this thread (10.8 bb/hr over 2501 hours).

What would you guess your average max BI was? Was it mostly 100bb max BI? Or do you typically / often sit in a "bigger" game?

What would you guess your average rake / BBJ drop was?

Again, the reason I mainly ask is because I still think people are lumping all live low stakes games into one and concluding 10bb/hr is still possible in all, but I simply don't believe comparing 1/2 vs 1/3 vs 2/5 is fair (even if all 100bb max BI) given the rake is so much more crushing at the lower end.

GthanksforpostingG

Thanks Squid. Convinces me these long-term 15-20BBs per hour stories I'm told by players is total bullshytt.
I can also not feel so bad about myself not being able to hit that 10BBs per hr over 1000 hours.
I almost did......once........if you filtered my session logger for 1k hrs from date I won 1.2k in 5 hrs @ 1/2NL when a Whale was at the table.

10bb/hour at 2-5 and lower is definitely attainable. At higher stakes like 5-T, id say 7-8bbs would be pushing the upper limit, and at 10-25, 5-6bbs/hour would be crushing. Of course this depends on your player pool, your skill level, and many other factors.

To be blunt, I think ive run pretty good in my poker career, with almost 5000 hours logged now across all games. I honestly expect my winrate to go down in the future, as variance always finds a way, villians get tougher, etc. Therefore, I highly doubt my numbers are long term sustainable, so take my winrates with a grain of salt:

2-5
1460 hours @ $52/hr

5-T
1260 hours @ $101/hr

10-25
600 hours @ $173/hr

The rest of my hours are a hodgepodge of 1-2, 1-3, 2-4, home games, etc.

I have a couple of 500 hours stretches that are 9-10BB/hr. Not many though. On of my poker friends puts up a good $20/hr at $1/2 pretty consistently, but he's better than I am and game selects like a mofo.

So the 10BB/hr level is definitely attainable with sufficient effort. But it's not something you're going to just fall into as a generic "good player".

But what does that mean though? Anyone can put up 10bb/hr over certain stretches, I'm sure we've all done it. What's his overall bottom line though?

Just so I"m absolutely clear: I've yet to see anyone post a 10bb/hr winrate here over a significant sample size at 1/2 or 1/3 with a 100bb max BI (correct me if I'm wrong by pointing to the post#). Comparing these stakes to 2/5 (especially anything with a larger max BI) is simply not a fair comparison as all these games are often raked exactly the same (no?) and yet 2/5 (especially with a larger max BI) gives far more opportunity to outrun the affect of rake.

GquestioningauthorityG

I totally agree, and wrote that initial post in a confusing way. Im not even sure how Id correct what i was trying to say, but i meant Id guess the average winrate of a good winning live player is probably 5-7bb/hr. All conjecture of course, but the path of this thread is that the number is 10bb/hr. I think that is the upper bound. And many in that upper bound are simply outliers due to variance.

Ignoring 200bb-uncapped game structures.

It means little statistically because his sample size is still lowish. Overall bottom line is very good. But yea, not the sample size you're looking for. Might be 1000 hours, honestly not too sure off the top of my head though.

I'm posing it for comparison. Someone that I speak to about hands and villains, and I know works his ass off studying the game can get there. And get there often over an OK window. So I think that *if* you could maintain that kind of effort and discipline over a long time, and game select well, 10bb/hr would be possible over a decent sample. But it would be near the very top of what I'd expect for long term winrate.

1000 hours is so lol. Don't make me drag out my 2000 hour results vs my ~1500 hour results comparisons!

GcluelessNLnoobG

Oh yea, I'm probably one of the few other people here that have long enough records to lose faith in 500-1000+ hour samples.

The eye test says that it should be possible, just very difficult. Not easy enough to toss around as a general rule.

You have said yourself that your room increased the rake and villains got better. So isn't that likely to be the reason for the drop off, rather than statistical noise?

Nithink1000hoursmeansmorethanyouthinkitmeansG

GG has to be the nittiest regular poster here. I think that's probably the major factor in what he reports as a steadily dropping win rate. He has said himself that he has tightened up even more lately. There's a point where you get too tight and nobody besides a random donk passing thru your room will pay you off.

I mean, isn't there math that tells us what confidence we can have in a 1000 hour sample +-? Pretty sure this has been done before ITT.

That's all well and good, but when you post a difference in winrates that I've posted of my first 2000 hours vs my last ~1500 hours *in the same game*, then you kinda of take that math with a grain of salt.

As others have mentioned above, there's lots of factors (and I won't deny any of them mentioned above). But one of them is that 1000 hours is **** all, especially if conditions can change. And this is part of my point. Can someone at the lower staked heavily raked games post a 10bb/hr over a hit-and-run sample size where conditions remain constant / etc.? Of course, we all probably have. But who is doing it *long term*? Haven't seen any proof of it yet (again, I'm kinda ignoring Squiddy's 2/5 NL game results since I believe there is quite a difference between the taxes in that game as opposed to the 1/2 and 1/3, and even comparing 1/2 and 1/3 might be quite lolz regarding this, although I could definitely be wrong on this).

ETA: FWIW, my results have ~doubled since I started nittying it up even more earlier this year (winrate during that time more returning to one of the past), but obviously very lol sample size and very good chance I've simply run well during that time.

Geveryoneelseisplayingintheexactsameconditionsthey were8yearsago?G

Your signature sums it up, in that most of my conclusions are accepted wisdom that I hadn't really accepted. I came from an online background, with constant 100+BB stacks and 2.5x pfr; in comparison to llsnl, you can play very loose online when you have position. Live, 1/3 stack depth is sometimes so bad that basically we should be folding most everything to a raise. (2/5 1K cap is much better ldo.) So I moved my game from LAG to TAG (which looks to the average llsnl rec as borderline nit).

Anyway, conclusions: I took calling almost completely out of my game. Suited cards just don't pay well enough as a caller, including Axs. (There was a HH thread recently about something like QJs otb, vs utg nit and no other callers iirc, the predictible call vs fold pre discussion ensued. Someone wrote that if the fold that hand otb they'll die inside. Well, these days, I'm likely to fold it as well. The last HH I posted, the only one in ages, was a spot IP with A6s, shoulda just folded pre.)

Also, I (no longer) almost never limp from EP/MP--I know you do and others do and have success and that's fine, but I saw l/c as a huge leak in my game. Waaaay too much l/c, c/f otf lines. I also found that in pots less than $100, I was essentially break even. Almost all of my money comes from big pots. Or as been said before, "AA/KK/btn, all the rest is meta." This is helpful in getting me into a more patient mindset, now that I don't have 6 tables of button clicking to attend to.

Again, nothing profound, but it is pretty different data from online, and I think the changes are good. Boring, but good. I just needed some numerical data to convince me. Most people don't think it's worth it but I always encourage those who want to give it a go, I think it's worthwhile.

Smylongwinded2centsW

Can confirm Squidder is a stone cold crusher at the $2/5 game (WR is $54 over 2500 hours). Have seen the stats first hand. Plus he is the GOAT recreator and a super nice guy to boot. (mikestarr, how about a 2+2 meetup at wallaby?)

However he is a STONE COLD FISH at the tech game. My dude won't even let me show him how to post his giraffes!

As it turned out, he was a 53% favorite with two cards to come, but as played he could have been drawing dead even if he hit his flush.
We didn't get all the details on how the hand played out but v could have also easily had AsXs (AsKs is not unimaginable) . I think he said it was only raised to 50 preflop, the other 950 each went in on the flop.