I wasn't thinking of that explicitly, but it is a good example. I skip MCC often for the same reason, and I've seen people wander up to the desk and inquire about a game in many markets, before going back to the blackjack pit when there are no seats.

Is it really that meaningless? Can you cherry pick a single period of 469 hours where you lost overall? My guess is no. If thats true, then 469 hrs gives us a decent guideline, doesnt it? What is your least profitable 469 hrs?

I can.

And breakeven.

And +$20/hr


Red line is the result of "the previous 500 hours leading to this point":


But then I also think I may be cursed with some awful run-bad based on the hands that I get cracked on a regular basis.

Maybe meaningless is too strong; I mean I'm pretty sure each individual 469 hour period has shown me to be a winner (so far), so, hurray.

But to compare it to other 469 hour periods that just happen to fall on a different day and think we can draw some meaningful conclusions from it (i.e. Thursday is much better than Wednesday by a factor of 3, which my results to date show, although admittedly only at half that sample size)? Meh.

GcluelessconclusionsnoobG

Kinda confusing but does that red line mean that your wr went from 20$/hr at ~375 hrs, and down to $5/hr at like ~450 hrs? That is a bad 75 hr stretch for like -$5k. Or maybe im reading it wrong.

Btw im not rubbing it in. I think you're a good player fwiw

@niceguy22

He never went to $5/hr on the red and blue line in the time line you depicted. Red didn't hit $5 until the 700's or so. The red line simply measures the last 500 hours on a trailing basis. Thus the greater volatility then the overall win rate - blue line. Green is over last 100 hours. Thus even greater volatility.

It's just graphing 500 and 100 hour intervals. At hour 1000 on the X axis, the red line represents his winrate from hours 500-1000, green line represents winrate from hours 900-1000. If you move 50 hours down the line to 1050, it then shifts to hours 550-1050 and 950-1050 for the red and green, respectively.

Essentially, all this graph is for is to show that at block X hours of time, his winrate has varied from values $Y to $Z, because he was responding to a comment about seeing a ~500 hour chunk with a negative winrate

Yea, you're reading it a little wrong. The blue line is overall winrate, which remains positive. The red only looks at the last 500 hours. So at hour 500 it covers hours 0-500, at hour 505 it's hours 5-505.

Thanks. I'm not a *great* player, and have some bad leaks. But I don't see many large datasets that anyone has bothered to look into in any depth for a live game. So there's some value in these.

I do have a stretch of 228 hours where I lost $5,500. Some of that was trying to play PLO, but most of it was NLHE. I think that was around hour 2000 or so.


Exactly. I like to show this graph to people that start worrying about or planning around 100 hour samples. It's also why I'm suspicious even of 500 hour samples. Although I think those are enough that you can tell a winning player from a complete donkey. I'd expect an overall losing player to be more likely to have negative 500 hours samples, etc.

Thanks for sharing Angrist. Just curious, you have a large sample size saying your def a winner at $1/2. Why not move up to $2/5? Or maybe you already do as well.

Couple reasons.

I have no roll for it. I pay for a lot of my vices out of poker winnings, as well as a few other expenses from time to time. Coupled with a few rather long breakeven stretches, I just don't have the spare cash to sit in a larger game. I've basically been operating on about $1-2K in "poker money" for over a year. Wouldn't want to sit at $2/5 without $5k rolled.

Second, there aren't many $2/5 games around. My local charity rooms don't run it, nor do the home games. But since most of those have $300 cap (or higher) BI's, they can play like $2/5 sometimes. So if I wanted to play $2/5 I'd have to drive downtown (~45 mins) to a casino I don't particularly like for it.

When I've observed those games, they tend to attract the stronger regs too. So when a $2/5 table opens a whale or two will go over, and 8 regs I'd rather not play against anyway, leaving the $1/2 games even fishier than they were before. Certainly needs to be a table to table decision.

It's time dependent too. From my observations day 2/5 is a goldmine as well weekends obviously. The midweek evening crowd is mostly grinding. Interestingly the couple of times I've been to the remodeled room, the 1/2 was fantastic regardless of day. With a $300 cap there was a lot more cheese in play too.

Interesting. I tend to think weekday daytime grinds are full of nitregs no?

flashes back to sitting on the floor of Greektown, back against the rock wall before there was such a thing as WIFI or even an Ipod

I've found 1/3 to be a great middle ground. The players typically are as bad as 1/2 players, but it's $500 cap, so it's deeper like 2/5

Those of you in South Florida, specifically in Pompano at the Isle. How are the 1knl games compared to 500nl? It is a significant skill jump? The 500nl games are so good that I am wondering if I should even consider shotting 1k until I am seriously overrolled. Plus the tables often straddling every hand to $10 so it's really playing 2-5-10. Just curious what you all think.

There isn't any 1/3 that runs here. We have several $300 cap 1/2 games though.

It's definitely an anomaly of this place. I see a lot of semi employed degens playing the day 2/5. Granted, I haven't sat it yet, but extensive railing indicates it's just terrible.

Hahaha ya. That place is a hole. I've heard rumors that the action actually is pretty good. Haven't been there in a long time.

Might want to ask in the South Florida thread in LCP.

this times 1 million

i put up a 12bb win rate over 1500 hours 2 years ago... in my last 1000 hours in the same exact player pool (maybe a little tougher) I have put up 1.5bb WR.... I had zero idea how hot I was running. 1000 hours isn't even close to enough to have any idea of winrate in my opinion.

Wow, nice example, imo.

Any guesses as to what you would attribute that to? Any significant changes in game conditions? You ran like god then / running not as good now? Player pool has caught on to your tendencies? Player pool has caught up in learning curve and isn't as ******ed? Rake increase? Plain 'ol variance? Or that ~1000 hours simply doesn't mean ****?

Gwouldlovetoseeagiraffeofthis,probablylookssimilar tomine,lolzG

that is wow. i quit poker.

I'm break even over 100 hrs so ya F pokerZ.

I'm up $114 in 118 hours in 2017, so inquire within regarding my coaching rates, ldo.

GwinningatpokerG

I will post my 1000 hour 2|5 graph when I get there. I'm pretty close. I had a stretch of nearly 400 hours where I did not make money, and two separate downswings of about 1400bb. Overall I am still winning $40-$45/h.

Holy high variance!

Gniceoverallresultsifyoucanstomachthevariance!G

Lulz