[OFFICIAL] Winrates, bankrolls, and finances - Page 440 - Live Low-stakes No Limit Poker Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash

[OFFICIAL] Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

View Poll Results: What is your Win Rate in terms of BB per Housr

Less than 0 (losing)

5 6.41%

0-2.5

0 0%

2.5-5

6 7.69%

5-7.5

8 10.26%

7.5-10

15 19.23%

10+

26 33.33%

Not enough sample size/I don't know

18 23.08%

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 440 of 1069

First

240 340 390 420 430 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 450 460 490 540 640 940

Last

Page 440 of 1069

First

240 340 390 420 430 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 450 460 490 540 640 940

Last

09-25-2015 , 06:49 AM

#10976

feel wrath

The Situation

Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 29,858

Quote:

Originally Posted by eldiesel

Is there any other time?

There is when you are also deducting rake in the same calculation

Quote

09-25-2015 , 06:52 AM

#10977

feel wrath

The Situation

Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 29,858

Quote:

Originally Posted by feel wrath

There is when you are also deducting rake in the same calculation

Ignore me

Quote

09-25-2015 , 07:15 AM

#10978

johnny_on_the_spot

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 11,608

holy ****, i hope some of you don't do your own taxes...

Quote

09-25-2015 , 07:26 AM

#10979

johnny_on_the_spot

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 11,608

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapidator

Three people check into a hotel room. The clerk says the bill is $30, so each guest pays $10. Later the clerk realizes the bill should only be $25. To rectify this, he gives the bellhop $5 to return to the guests. On the way to the room, the bellhop realizes that he cannot divide the money equally. As the guests didn't know the total of the revised bill, the bellhop decides to just give each guest $1 and keep $2 as a tip for himself. Each guest got $1 back: so now each guest only paid $9; bringing the total paid to $27. The bellhop has $2. And $27 + $2 = $29 so, if the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?

Spoiler:

Quote

09-25-2015 , 07:39 AM

#10980

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigSkip

Go home winrate thread. You're drunk.

Wow - this is the best summary

Quote

09-25-2015 , 07:46 AM

#10981

DK Barrel

Concept of the Week author

Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 6,797

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angrist

How many drunk idiots stumble onto a 0.01/0.02 table and punt off stacks like they're playing hands of blackjack again?

More like how many winning 1/2 players are playing 24 tables at once at 90 hands/hr?

I don't think there are any more fish overall live or online, but I would bet winners/BE players are playing more hands online overall than fish, which is effectively the same as outnumbering fish.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 07:50 AM

#10982

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

Bellhop question is so great

(but damn it people, the WR sum + rake + tips = LR sum is so simple and factual quit trying to complicate it and ****ing up the math in the process)

Next up for debate - who pays the vig on a sports bet? (please don't start that debate.. I am joking)

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:04 AM

#10983

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

The complication is that LR is actually a negative number, so the math is really:

WR sum + rake + tips + LR sum = 0

Or simpler

Rates sum + rake + tip = 0

Or if you want to think of rake and tips as individual

(Net home + player's rake paid + player's tips paid) sum = 0

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:05 AM

#10984

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

Sorry - don't know to write a "sigma" symbol to make it look like math class

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:06 AM

#10985

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

So pre rake and pre tips, losing players AND winning players perform better.. duh.. if I didn't throw money out of my stack I do better - whether or not I win or lose is inconsequential

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:22 AM

#10986

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

So now in simplest and seemingly obvious understanding

Loss rate totals are much greater than win rate totals because of rake and tips... so that needs to be accounted for by either having many more losing players than winners at a table or huge losing amounts. Both happen in practice.

A shallow and tight PREflop player can effectively bound his loss rate - so tables made up of short stacks and tight preflop play are not very beatable in high rake.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:26 AM

#10987

zoltan

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 21,490

lol @bip! getting sucked into this circle jerk.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:39 AM

#10988

11t

Bo Pelini's #1 Fan

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 31,420

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lapidator

Lol

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:43 AM

#10989

johnny_on_the_spot

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 11,608

maybe accounting class should start with an easier problem:

how is everyone's WR affected if it's a time rake?

Quote

09-25-2015 , 08:51 AM

#10990

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoltan

lol @bip! getting sucked into this circle jerk.

I held out as long as possible.. but woke up in a mood for pain I guess

Quote

09-25-2015 , 09:07 AM

#10991

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

We also went from "tons of player @ LLSNL are winning 10bb/hr" to "nobody @ LLNSL can win 10bb/hr". ... also known as the battle to be wrongest

Thanks to everyone who posts results and congrats to the ones winning. I wish more people post giraffes (even short samples) - just so all readers got a better picture of actual results in the wild.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 09:13 AM

#10992

bip!

Slow Pony

Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 14,205

Just so I can be fully mocked - I will post my LLSNL results later.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 11:53 AM

#10993

Garick

Oberbiergenießer

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 26,516

Quote:

Originally Posted by meale

Okay, don't worry about people fabricating evidence. I'm not worried about that. I still haven't seen any evidence whatsoever of 10bb/hr being reasonable.

My claim, if you will, is that beating ANY poker game for 40bb/100 is actually laughable, especially with the higher rake in live games.

And yes, if I can see a PI graph of 10bb/hr over 2k+ hours, I'll be the first to eat my words and say it's possible.

I'm hearing all these people say 10bb/hr is the baseline for a crusher, but has anyone actually seen proof of someone do this over a reasonable sample?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pay4Myschool

My winrate at 2/5 over 900 hours this year is 56/hr, largest "downswing" was 6k and I attribute that to some overly aggro play and the worst variance I've experienced. 10k+ just seems fathomable, and I've played 2.5k hours lifetime of 2/5 where prior to this year my winrate was in the low 40s

Runbad is a crutch by some. Double check your redline.

Not going to spend the time to find more, especially as most people who post "long term" results post them for the year, and no one I know plays 2K hours in a year, but here's one example of 10+BBs/hour over > 2K hours.

I think you're projecting your Aussie games on the rest of the world. Many of us play at places that allow 200BB buy ins, and of course, the rake is ridic in Oz. 10BB/hr is definitely doable long term in the right markets in the US.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 12:40 PM

#10994

Dopedupwalrus

journeyman

Join Date: Jun 2015 Posts: 329

Quote:

Originally Posted by bip!

/Users/dan/Desktop/Poker Winnings.png

/Users/dan/Desktop/Poker Winnings.png

[IMG]/Users/dan/Desktop/Poker Winnings.png[/IMG]

Dang... I can't figure out the image thing... The line goes up, tho.

Total Hrs 249
Total Winnings 10758
$/Hr 43.20481928
Hands Played (30/hr) 7470

1/2: 70% Hours, 60% Winnings
1/3: 30% Hours, 40% Winnings

Quote

09-25-2015 , 12:50 PM

#10995

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

smh...

Let me try.

[img]/Users/GreatestPokahPlayerEvah/Desktop/Nudeselfie.png[/img]

Quote

09-25-2015 , 01:05 PM

#10996

bobman0330

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 24,234

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angrist

Conservation of manies. Draw a control volume around the table. Winners take X bb/hr out, dealer takes Y bb/hr rake out, fishes put Z bb/hr in.

X + Y - Z = 0

You can add a "dealer takes Y2 bb/hr in tips out" too if you want.

The X and Z might be split un-evenly depending on the number of players, like 1 winner for 0.75*X and another for 0.25*X, but whatever, we can get an average winrate.

So a rake adjusted winrate is trival. There's no double counting at all.

If you're trying to say "in a game where there was no rake, I'd be making X+5 bb/hr" ... then you need to figure out who's paying how much of the rake (and/or tips). What are we assuming for the distribution of rake/hand at that point?

If we assume it's constant among players (not sure I buy that), then our raw win rate is (our fraction of ) X + Y/N_players_total.

Loss rates are on average Z/N_losing_players + Y/N_players_total.

Didn't anyone pay attention in thermodynamics?

This post makes me very happy.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 01:13 PM

#10997

bobman0330

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 24,234

I don't want to be too harsh, but there's an obvious psychological incentive for aspiring pros to believe that LLSNL can be beaten for more than 5 BBs an hour, which is that no one wants to believe that the greatest monetary rewards their profession can offer them is $25 an hour + no benefits (if they crush the biggest game in many rooms). That doesn't make it true though. A better thing to believe is that if you want to be a pro, you need to plan to beat a 5/T or higher game.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 01:17 PM

#10998

Richard Parker

banned

Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 13,949

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobman0330

A better thing to believe is that if you want to be a pro, you need to plan to beat a 5/T or higher game.

Ya, but how many markets spread these games consistently?

Understand that there are very few locales capable of supporting serious poker players who could afford to call themselves "pros" and such markets should already be saturated with these players.

Poker may not be a zero sum game per se, but these individual markets are certainly zero sum as indicated by last few pages of discussions on loss rate.

If you are a new poker player hoping to make poker part of your income, be prepared to work harder than everyone else in your pool...and do it quick.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 01:19 PM

#10999

johnny_on_the_spot

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 11,608

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobman0330

probably why you see so many 'i used to play poker professionally, but...' stories.

way less stressful to just go get some random job in a random company that pays 20-30k year + benefits rather than grinding out the same living with way worse hours and way higher stress.

Quote

09-25-2015 , 01:30 PM

#11000

bobman0330

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 24,234

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Parker

You should factor the unavailability of these games into your plans. But most big metro areas that have poker have 5/T games. Agreed they're challenging to beat, but if you want to make more than $30ish/hour, I strongly suspect it's easier to do it at 5/T than 2/5.

Quote

Page 440 of 1069

First

240 340 390 420 430 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 450 460 490 540 640 940

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 440 of 1069

First

240 340 390 420 430 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 450 460 490 540 640 940

Last