Quote:
Originally Posted by Aisthesis
I'll just say what I've made:
At 2/5 over a lot of hours, I had a win-rate of $15/hour. That includes sessions (and months) where I was making stupid experiments, as well as obvious bone-headed plays. I was also playing much too tight, often bluffing ineptly when I bluffed and am convinced (after backing down to 1/2) that I missed an enormous amount of value on missed re-raises (like almost never re-raising AK regardless of reads and stuff like that).
At the 2/5 I was playing I could see running at over $30/hour with very near optimal play. I'm very skeptical of anyone claiming over $40/hour if they include their bad months and stupid experiments in there, too (or are only counting a really hot run of a few months)--and anyone who is completely immune from those is no longer playing 2/5 imo.
At 1/2 I'm running at roughly $25/hour although the sample is smaller--and since 1/2 is the only NLHE game spread at the local casino, there are some very good players in it (as well as some horrible ones, for sure). But I honestly don't even like the 1/2 where everyone at the table is a complete idiot, although those are probably even more profitable if you have the patience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aisthesis
On the "down months" issue: I recall that Barry Greenstein in Ace on the River bragged about going 3 years with at most 1 down month. THAT claim sounds credible and very impressive to me.
I also don't think it needs to be a source of embarassment to attribute down months solely to the cards, although they can be a reason for getting started on bad play. I've definitely had more than 1/year for the time I've played. But I'm also pretty sure that all of the ones I've had have been the result of experimental plays that were not good--but I had to try them and feel like I learned from it.
Playing regularly but consitently well for the full month, I think would have had some months with only marginal winnings but probably actually maybe like on average .5/year actually down (and even that probably only just close to break even).
This all rings very true to me. $30/hour = crushing 2/5NL for about 10ptbb/100, which is a sick winrate over any significant sample size.
I don't agree with the phrase "stupid experiments" tho. I think that these should be more aptly called "growth periods." Every (thinking) poker player goes through phases in his game where he's trying new things that he's either thought up, read, observed, or heard about.
Maybe you went through a period of 3betting a lot more, or altering your standard preflop raise sizes, or semi-bluffing less, etc. Some of them work for your style, and some won't, but they all have an effect on your bottom line until you get things sorted out. After you've gone through them, your game is certainly improved, even if the experiments failed.