Update:

Sessions: 109
Profit: $28,260
Hourly: $36.33/hr
Standard Deviation: 547.1/h
Total time: 777.6 hrs
Avg Session: 7.13 hrs

"It's impossible online so it can't be possible live" is a tiresome excuse. It means nothing. You may be right that 10bb/hr live is impossible but it has nothing to do with online winrates. Besides, the people who feel it is possible are the ones with thousands of hours of live experience.

Also, online anyone can play anywhere. There isn't one site that is the best to play on in terms of softness and volume because it balances out. In live poker you do get games in certain areas that are just way softer than anywhere else. Heck I figure my winrate between the two nearest casinos to me might be 6bb/hr at one and -4bb/hr at the other, the games are that different.

I'm glad that online players seem to think nobody's making money live though.

So a guy that makes 25 bucks an hour playing 2-5 is a crusher?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using 2+2 Forums

Just wanted to share my experience regarding variance:

Results until march 2015:

47€/h in 1400 hours (9bb/h)

70% 2/4, 20% 5/5+, 10% PLO

Results from march ongoing:

-14€/h in 430 hours (-3bb/h)

50% 2/4, 20% 5/5+, 30% PLO


It would be hard, If I would show someone my results of the last six month of the year and convince him to be a winning player. And before people step in and tell me that a huge part of the downer is due to bad play, I can assure that the level of mistakes might be slightly higher (due to low confidence) but my overall game is now much better than two years ago.

To be fair, yeah that's pretty good. I think the ceiling is a lot higher but someone who is actually making a living wage long-term in live poker is by all means crushing.

There's another distinction that should be made about winrates and that's volume. Way, way easier to have a nice winrate playing a few hours a week than when making yourself do it full time. I think that's another one of the biases that makes huge winrates seem more common than they really are.

The problem is you're playing PLO

I agree. PLO contributes a bit to the increased variance but it's also Holdem were I get huge suckouts / cooler. I lost 17 sessions out of my last 20 sessions (6/6 PLO sessions)

Yes lol.

the skill gap is much narrower in online poker. in live there are people who routinely sit down with little to no knowledge of the game at 1/2 and 2/5, obviously less often at 2/5, but it happens. many of the people playing 2/5 wouldnt be able to beat 50nl online, some might not be able to beat 20nl. you get a very knowledgable person playing against people like that and the only way the lose significant money is by being coolered.


meh, not too much really.
win rate? 30k hands is a drop in the bucket. with an avg of 25 hands/hr, 30k hands = 1200 hours. say you have a 10bb/hour win rate. thats $12,000. say your next session you play 8 hours and you lose $900, 3 BIs for most places. that drops your win rate from 10bb/hr to 9.19bb/hr.

i'd say when your winrate doesnt fluctuate more than a maybe a tenth or 2 of a point when winning/losing multiple buy ins, you can start to actually infer things.

but then think about this => my current online database has 300k hands. all of my PPs have over 1k sample each. i have a + return on all of them except for 88/77. the sample size is still too small for them. so even once you get into huge practically unattainable numbers for live players (300k hands = ~12k hours, probably 99% of players never make it that long), you're still unable to really pull out any data past a win rate. i need probably 20x hands (so 6 million) to get anywhere near an accurate representation of how i play my PP.

Concur. I'm a lifetime break even player at NL50 and smaller online (though a laughably small sample-size by OL standards), and I've beaten live games from 1/1 through 2/5 for 10BBs/hr+ consistently. I'm definitely no crusher. It's just that droolers get bumhunted so fast OL that they don't last, whereas live droolers are very common.

So a realistic crusher @2/5 is $25hr...what's a realistic crusher @1/2 $15hr?

I can't beat online either

It's hard and stuff

Realistic crusher is an oxymoron

If you just want a number to aspire to there isn't a fixed answer to that.

+1

i think it would be extremely room dependent. some rooms a person crushing might make 5bb/hr, some rooms they might make 10bb/hr, etc, etc.

the only real way to figure it out would be to figure out the winrate of every player who plays regularly to semi regularly. from there you could figure out who the crushers are.

Oh but there is...about tree fiddy

I'm not comparing 2/5 to 50NL online. The top 50NL regs on Stars would absolutely dominate any live game (assuming they learn a bit about the differences).

My point was that 2NL online, where you literally have people donating money every other hand, cannot be beaten for much more than 20bb/100 over any large sample.

I think comparing 2/5 live and 2NL Zoom is actually a respectable comparison. 5NL online might be closer if you disagree. The point is, 40bb/100 over 2k hands is so impossible ainec.

what kind of live poker experience do you have to reach that conclusion?

This is not necessarily true.

Live poker is a different animal and requires interactions with other human being in close proximity .

Plus online poker environment is presumably consistent in its own way, so these players may not necessarily be able to adjust to a completely different environment that is live poker.

I know how much money there is to be made in LLSNL around my area, and in terms of math related skillset, I am sure that it requires far less work and higher reward than online poker, and yet, I have never seen an online player in these games on a consistent basis.

It's not uncommon that people perceive anything above their own ability as impossible. Without internet and mass media, I personally think that 5 minute mile is physically impossible.

Apple, meet orange.

Part of it, I think, is that online fish see that their account is drained and they're able to realize it's not going well for them. Live fish just keep re-loading from their wallet/ATM and don't really notice. It's easier for live fish to convince themselves it's not that bad, I think.

Both games obv have the whales who just don't care about losing the money.

Very true.

For a while, people were posting their uncapped 1/2 winrate as 100bb 1/2 itt.

I googled this for LOL:

http://www.statisticbrain.com/percen...eir-checkbook/

This poll should give you a good idea why losing players keep coming back, and many of them think they're slight winners.

This.

And, by the time you reach enough hours to be confident in your winrate, the game has probably changed significantly (lineup changes, style adjustments, etc). So, your winrate was for essentially a different game.

Winrates are interesting to look at, but mostly to confirm you are beating the game. We should all focus on plugging leaks, not reaching some WR goal.

Was it DGAF who says (TV's) Survivor vs Chess?

Congrats on the excellent results!

Celebrity Jeopardy vs Jeopardy.

I just said it, feel free to quote me until end of time.