I am playing for profit. Basically I am at a point in my life where I decided I was sick of doing things I didn't enjoy so I decided to take a few months off and play poker and travel a little bit.

I don't see poker as something I want to do to make a living but I am taking it serious for the first time in my life and trying to see how good I can get if I devote a lot of my attention to it.

I am starting to realize how small of a sample size this is by reading through older post in this thread. Last night I played for 5 hours and ran really hot for a $3400 profit.

So now my hourly is $63.59 over 98.9 hours.

I am going to try to not get overconfident and just keep playing my game. I may update every 50 hours or so but my goal I gave myself was to average 8 BB per hour over 500 hours.

50 hour updates are extremely pointless please don't do that lol. as you can see, your sample size is pretty meaningless at this point.

create a pg&c if you want to track individual sessions

I don't understand how people have these massive winning or losing sessions. I play like a 15/12 internet TAG with an I'd say average 3 bet frequency. Not really that nitty. I never limp unless it's the SB or there's been like four limpers already but even then I'd rather raise. In the last 750 ish hours I've never had a session worse than -300 bb or better than +500 bb. Mainly play 1/2 and 1/3 with some 2/5 mixed in.

how deep can/do you buy-in?

In my regular game, 2-5, 1k cap buyin, I agree +$3.4k session is rare, but for me there are quit some $2k sessions either win or lose. Not long session tho, normally 5 hours. I don't know about others. Also I feel like it's quit easy to have a downswing way over $6k-8k lost, is this normal? As lots of posts saying in 2-5 game, 6-8k is quit a large downswing.

Always the max at 1/2 or 1/3 (300 to 500), 600 for 2/5. Not max buy in but still weird how in my 120 hours ish at 2/5 never had a session +/- 1k. Still playing the same game as 1/2. 1/3 except 3 betting more if anything and obviously defending lighter vs 3 bets which should lead to greater variance.

Losing 3 BI or winning 5 BI is a bit extreme for most people in a 5 hour session. 12 hour session sure though.

So I'd wonder what BI size and session duration Rat has too.

I don't think that a +- 4 BI volatility is out of the norm for just about anyone. You'd get that easily with 2 losing sessions in a row or two-three winners. So $4k at a $1k cap game makes sense. $8k is a little much, but not insane. Especially if you either tilt a little bit or get yourself into games where you're a dog and don't realize it.

I'd expect that the pushback you're getting about your results being weird is from people assuming a $500 BI instead.

I have had several +$1000 games playing 1/2 and 1/3 as well. I really good at getting lucky though.

ya @lrr do you play short sessions? that could have something to do with it also.

no +/- 200bb sessions definitely seems kinda weird (for me - it depends on your play style); but 120 hours is a very small sample so it could easily just be variance.

or maybe you're a nit

Playing 15/12 definitely has something to do with it IMO. That's super nitty. Also it 120 hours.

Also betting thinly, raising thinly, etc etc etc.

Giving action to the action players is important too. If they think you are a nit they won't want to play with you.

I don't know what 15/12 means so you probably want me in your game lol.

VPIP/PFR.

Considering starting to play Live on the side..

Would beating 10-25NL on WPN 9-max be close to the talent I'd face at 1/3 and 2/5?

My experience playing live is minimal, but I do know the game is about patience. Can find stretches of no playable spots for hours, but have to keep going.

If I played 1/3 to start, could I implement exploitative strategies similar to what I use for micros online?

What is a "Good/Solid" win rate per hour playing 1/3?


Thanks guys!

It means that he plays about 15% of hands, of which 12% he's coming in for a raise, so only 3% of the time is he just calling. That is very, very tight for live low stakes.

I don't know WPN, but generally if you can beat 25NL online, 2/5 live is easy once you adjust. You can generally be even more exploitative live than you can in the online micros.

General consensus is that over 5bb/hr is good, and over 10bb/hr is crushing.

Dunno about 15/12 being nitty. Pretty standard TAG game for online full ring. I open about 10 - 12% of hands from EP and anywhere from 45% to ATC on the button depending on who's behind. But even though those are my theoretical ranges I feel like in actuality I played way nittier due to being card dead pre and not abusing that image enough. A lot of my 2/5 sessions were mundane and I barely got into big pots. I remember being all excited about reading Ed Miller's advice to barrel the turn more to threaten stacks but rarely getting the opportunity to actually apply it.

I played 28 sessions total for a total of 125.5 hours. I guess with the average session length being not even 5 hours and the fact that I buy in for $600 and not $1k, results shouldn't be surprising.

By the way how the hell do you upload pictures on this site now? Gyazo and imgur don't seem to be working.

If full ring is anything like 6 Max on wpn in terms of toughness you'll crush any live 1/3, 2/5 and probably 5/10

People may combine a night's worth of poker into session when they state their session totals. I for one do. I constantly move tables/casinos and rather than say I had a 200/400/300/300 group of sessions I'd just say I'm up 1200 for the night.

Your skill would be more than enough but the game is completely different. Like 90% of what you use for bet sizing is different, 3 bets basically don't exist, multiway is the norm, and ranges pre and on all streets are so so much wider.

Yes, and mainly because of those massive differences I consider statements such as "if you beat 10/25nl online, you'll crush 1/3, 2/5 and probably 5/10 live" as nonsense, at least as a given. We shouldn't pretend that adjusting to live play is easy. Sure, for some it actually is, but for others it can definitely take a while.

The majority of players who appear to me to be good online players (and I can spot them a mile away based on their look and their playing style) usually get their asses kicked playing live until they learn to adjust. Lots of them never seem to adjust and just keep blasting away, barrelling and value owning themselves. I actually hear them sometimes saying things like "how can you not reraise that preflop?" when they bet 3 streets with JJ and lose a big pot to QQ and things like that.

A player good enough to win at a nice rate online should have the aptitude to crush live poker, but it is a completely different game as a few have already pointed out.

Hi guys,

Looking for some feedback here for my last year of poker. I have played exclusively 1/3 and made a total of 2,798 dollars in 2017 while playing 333 hours.I know the sample size is LOL small but thoughts overall?

I'll never knock somebody who is positive so pat yourself on the back for being a winner. That being said I think there is plenty of room to improve from 3BB/hour. Small sample yadayadayada but assuming it is close to what you should be I think you either play too tight/passive, call too light, or bet way too loose. You probably have a good idea of which of those you are so I'd try and make adjustments and go from there.

Sample size is too lol for anyone's thoughts to be meaningful

Well, you're winning, so you're doing better than the field. 3bb/hr is not exactly wining at a huge clip though. Hard to know at 333 hours if that's just variance or if you're leaving money on the table.

Post some hands ITF for discussion and you'll get a better idea of how you're playing.

Working f/t with a family, it's hard to find the time to study/improve & 333 hours over 365 days isn't getting you the necessary experience. I'd be happy having not lost & be looking to give up t.v. as much as possible & study instead. 1 hr a day would help a lot. When I took up the guitar in my 20s I managed to find 2 hrs a day with 2 kids, but it was an acoustic. Didn't have DVR back in the day, so guess what I was doing during commercials of football games....