Not saying it's impossible, but there are more 1/2 games in the country where it isn't achievable than games where it is. Even more difficult is finding one of those rooms where it's achievable at a full-time volume.

$60/hour is effectively impossible.

Impressive results, and sounds like good BI / table selection conditions.

Having said that, I'm pretty sure if I compared my best 400 hour stretch versus my worst 400 stretch, you wouldn't think you were comparing rates of the same player.

G400hoursisstillafairlysmallsamplewhereanything(go odorbad)canhappenG

I would expect that you are effectively a different player between 2 different 400 hour stretches.

Sent from my LG-D801 using 2+2 Forums

I probably haven't evolved (or devolved as some would argue) too much, but there is some truth to that. My guess is that game I play in during those stretches has probably changed a lot more than my style.

But still, I'm guessing still fairly drastic differences in WR (although I honestly haven't computed my worse vs best 400 hr stretch so I can't say for absolute certain).

GcluelessNLnoobG

You'll be surprised how untrue that is.

We would all like to believe that after we spend 400 hours doing something, we are much better, but for most players to win after 400 hours, they probably have already peaked by 100th hour in terms of skill.

Just look around at some of the posters in this forum, most of them are just spinning in circles.

Utalking abt me bruh?

You're still wandering, wouldn't call it a circle!

Is not playing for months count as circles?

I think this is very true. The only times of rapid progression and improvement is when circumstances around us have changed significantly. Such situations as
- learning new game
- moving up
.. compounded with getting your teeth kicked in.


Otherwise, poker players don't really make progress if they are in a comfortable familiar game winning more than zero.

(hell - they may even regress a bit)

I think your trolling has improved drastically Slim, you should give yourself a pat on the back.

GcirclewalkerG

The more hours I put in, the funnier the "I did this in 300 hours" poast boasts get.

I have been spinning in circles the last 2000 hours or so.

Luckily I was pretty good before then.

Right? I just looked at my 2014 results in 300 and 400 hour chunks. Pretty drastic differences. Even in 500 hour chunks they were pretty different. Granted, I was a much better player by the end of the year because it was the first year I actually took poker seriously and put in volume, but I was a winner in every segment, just by totally different amounts.

Here are some chunks from the last two years.

2014:
Total: $10,989/599.8 = $18.32/hr
1st Half: $3,758/243.6 = $15.43/hr
2nd half: $7,231/356.2 = $20.30/hr

2015:
Total: $1,096/548.6 = $2.0/hr
1st Half: -$1,468/270.9 = -$5.42/hr
2nd Half: $2,564/277.7 = $9.23/hr


There's a smattering of PLO in there that throws things off, particularly for 2015, but I can't filter it quickly here.

The game conditions were a bit better in 2014 than 2015, and I lost more playing PLO in 2015, but there's a 600 hour sample of $18/hr.

Why waste your time with the short stack, hit and run nits? Yes 1-2 is a 300 max but many players are not buying in for the max. Even at Parx. The crappy players buy in for near minimum and if they god, forbid, actually luck out and double up, they don't stay and gamble it away. IMO there are way more degens playing 2-5 at Parx than there are at 1-2.

Besides, 2-5 is so soft I could never imagine playing any lower. If you try this goal you will be costing yourself money.

He already said he moved on.

He set a goal to beat 1/2 at $60 hr in 2016. He would have to explain why he thinks that is remotely possible or why he would even bother to attempt this. If he thought that was possible to beat 1-2 at $60 an hour than he must think that there is a chance that playing 1-2 could be making him more money than 2-5.

>He set a goal to beat 1/2 at $60 hr in 2016

That's easy. Play two good sessions of stack-a-donk in January, quit for the year.

I have to say, wrt poker dying, there's at least one more poker boom coming. It's going to be bigger than the Moneymaker boom. Whenever online poker is finally completely legalized in the US (imo <10 years), we're going to see a boom the likes of which we haven't seen before. Think about it. All these legal websites now advertising poker during the college football game, then they want to try online, then live as well. Just look at what happened with DFS and how that exploded.

Do people multi table DFS cash games?

Actually yeah, I don't know much about DFS but I'm pretty sure each pro submits like 100 lineups per thing they enter

What is so hard to figure out? I think the upper limit for 1/2 at my room is $60/hour. I think the upper limit for 2/5 is $100-120/hour. Since 2/5 is more profitable I've only played two 1/2 sessions this year.

I personally don't participate in "maximum WR" discussions because I think they are all flawed. The theoretical "max WR" that could be achieved would be the amount you could win if you could see your opponents hole cards. Just pulling a number out of my ass, that could be $500+ at 2/5.

Therefore, the better hand reader you become and the better you are at bet sizing to manipulate your villains, you should be able to keep increasing your WR. Most people likely move up in limits rather than maxing out a WR at a lower stake, but I am of the belief that 10 BB's/hour is nowhere near the attainable limit for low-to-mid stakes NL.

Really?

Wow.