Try to keep focusing on making the right plays. And if you feel your self doubting your self, post a hand or three and see if people would have played it the same way.

Good luck.

There’s no way to get out of a stretch like this without playing more. If you are a winner things will turn around soon enough. Just have confidence and play your best and keep in mind the long term. Gl!

Re: mindset -- keep in mind 90 hours is a drop in the long-run bucket. At live poker that's around 2700 hands, and I think around 100K hands is the point where winrate is fairly converged/you can have a good sense of whether and how much you're winning. I didn't answer your previous post but what I'd say about 1300 hours at 5.5bb/hour is that you are likelier than not a winner, but we have a tough time saying by how much (or even with 100% certainty that you are a winner).

The other problem, especially with live poker, is that because the hands come so slowly, the ecosystem moves with you -- and you move, too. You're presumably improving by reading on here, thinking about hands, and so on -- so your winrate should theoretically be increasing. Depending on lineups at your casinos and when you play, your winrate might be better or worse (e.g. Fridays and Saturdays tend to be softer in most places, so if you're playing then you might me less able to beat Tuesdays, and so on).

So that's the mindset -- 90 hours is suuuuper small. I played about the same number of hands online in the last three days in about six hours, and that's at a site where I can only four table because there just isn't enough liquidity in games and so on -- once upon a time in the heyday, I could play around 1,000 hands/hour at 10-12 tables.

Im sure this will piss plenty of people off like usual, but the problem is that most people think they are making the right plays but they aren't.

We all know there is plenty of variance in poker. If you are a 5BB/hr winner long term, you will go thru streteches of breaking even and stretches where you win 10BB+/hr. If you stick to your strategy, whatever it is, the cards will turn around and if you make the "right plays" you will converge back to around your 5BB win rate over time.

However, when you open your mind and figure out that your strategy is not "right" and there are many way to increase your win rate and you start experimenting with new things, that is when you will get better results. It boggles my mind that there are so many people posting here that are 100% convinced that the lines they take are the best lines and nobody can convince them otherwise.

Whatever your win rate is, it can be better. At least until you get into the 10-15BB/hr range.

For 1/2, if you're not over 15BB/hr you're not close to making the "right" plays. Sure, if you're winning anything at all you're doing better than most and if you're winning 5-8BB/hr you're well on your way and should be proud but you should also always be looking to get better and find ways to increase your win rate, not posting absolutes in the strat forum because you are making all kinds of mistakes without even knowing it.

For 2/5, if you're not over 12BB/hr, you're not close to making the "right" plays.

For 5/10, if you're not over 10BB/hr, you're not close to making the right plays.

Some people are happy to make $35/hr at 2/5 and they should be. Thats pretty damned good. When I was a $35/hr winner at 2/5 I was happy too, but I was also always looking for new lines and new exploits to win more.

The "my way is the best and only way" attitude in most strat threads is old and tired especially when it comes from people who arent beating the game for 12+BB/hr.

PS...this is in no way meant to mean that my way is the best way. That's my whole point. We should always be looking to figure out what other people are doing better than we are and adding that to our games. Very few people know that the "right" plays are because most hands don't have a "right" line.

Tl;dr for the above:

Most people dont play optimally so keep looking at what you're doing and try to continuously improve.

Very good post, +1.

Try not to sweat it too much, especially as a rec player. After all, it's supposed to be an enjoyable hobby (is there really any other reason to play if you've got a good paying job?). And you're winning. Don't beat yourself up too much.

As for Mike's post above, I'll let you dig thru this thread yourself and find all the significant sample sizes of 15bb/hr at 1/2 (hint: don't knock yourself out too hard trying to find a single one, cuz you won't). Not saying it's impossible. Just saying attempting to compare anything you do to the top 0.01% is sorta gonna set yourself up for failure.

GgoodluckG

Hey guys currently trying to grind out 1/3 with a day job that allows me to save/replenish bankroll if needed.

I have a quick question: when people say hey you should have 20 buy ins to take a shot at 2/5, do they mean a max buy in ($1k most places) or 100 BB ($500)

My plan is to slowly transition to 2/5 and eventually (assuming my results are good enough) move to Vegas to play so just trying to budget and keep expenses low.

Do most people at 2/5 max buy in for the $1k or $500? If I do buy in with $500 would I feel “short”.

Just looking for insight from people who have taken shots at 2/5 what they consider a “buy in” 100 BB or max?

Thanks in advance

I believe $10k is enough to shot-take at 2/5 regardless of if you're buying in at $500 or $1k. You should be fairly willing to drop back down, though, and only play in the 2/5 if the lineup is soft -- if you sit in the 2/5 and discover it's filled with tough regs 3-betting then you're going to have a more variant time than you would at the 1/2. The other thing is if 2/5 is getting a lot of straddles you're going to be basically playing 5/10, which $10k isn't enough for really, so be careful.

It's a balancing act -- in a super soft 2/5 game, you could play it even if it's somewhat aggressive or straddled frequently. In a tougher 2/5 game you probably need a longer roll.

you have a day job - worry less about "how much BR do i need to play 2/5" and worry more about getting comfortable playing at $5 blind levels. play it when it looks good. the rake is usually much cheaper which is one less thing you need to worry about when trying to beat the game.

You wont find hardly any significant samples of 1/2 at 15BB win rate because people who are that good move up to 2/5 before they get what you would call a significant sample.

Also, the majority of the best poker players don't post here at all and they sure don't post graphs. They may post here for a while but as they get better and better there's less and less for them to learn here and they stop posting.

I can guarantee you if there was some sort of prop bet to make it worth their while, that the best 2/5 players could move back to 1/2 and destroy it for over 15BB/hr. I'm 100% sure of that.

I also have no doubt that you are experienced enough and can narrow people's ranges well enough that you could significantly increase your own win rate if you really wanted to. You don't want to step out of your comfort zone and I'm not hating on you for that. Its fine. But that is what is limiting you and makes you think these win rates I posted are impossible to reach.

Nobody should be trying to compare themselves to a 1/2 15BB/hr crusher or a 2/5 12BB/hr crusher. Its just going to make you feel bad about yourself. But what you should be doing if you want to get better is watching these guys and trying to figure out what they are doing that you're not doing. Whether its bluffing more, over betting certain boards, down betting, raising speculative hands, 3 betting more often. Whatever it is, you can bet those guys arent following strict preflop hand charts and things like that.

That's the standard answer.

But I simply don't buy it. The lowest stakes game are real rake traps so unless your game often plays very deep I think it's fair to ask for proof before believing this.

Gnotbuyingwhatyou'resellingG

I could post a 7-800 hr graph but I'm sure you'll say that's not significant. The 1/2 games in my room are not even close to deep. Half the table buys in for $60-$100. Id be willing to bet that I haven't won more than 3-5 hands of 1/2 where we were over 100BBs deep.

Occam's razor... it's the standard answer because it's the most logical answer. if someone is even a 10bb/hr winner at 1/2, after 400 hours, they'll have 8k. and they'll hear over and over that 1/2 is a rake trap. why wouldn't they move up to 1/3 or 2/5 if it's available?

you are an outlier in that you have a very large sample size at a low stake. most people who have had your success at 1/3 would be long gone from that stake before coming to within 1/3 of your sample size.

My big sticking point on this is that it's just too much of a market inefficiency.

There are a lot of very smart people in the world and many of them don't make much money. For example, they could be educators, or just people who never got into the corporate world for one reason or another.

Everybody has heard of poker by now and understands it is possible to beat it. Resources for learning the game quickly abound. Also, while playing poker gets old, you make your own hours and for most people it's going to be better than most other jobs.

You don't need a huge BR to get started at 1/2-1/3.

So when people claim you can make like $80k/year, tax free playing 1/3... I just don't think it adds up. If you could, then people would do it until you couldn't.

Not that all these people would become full time 1/3 grinders, but they would at least play part time on the weekends, when the win rate is even higher.

Yeah. I mean, if we saw just a *handful* of graphs in this thread that could support that (even if they were still brushed off as outliers). Just a bunch of people sitting back easily crushing games (heck, even for just 9bb/hr instead of 15bb which I'm sure Mike would admit would be pretty difficult/taxing). But we don't.

But that's probably only because people don't like to brag on the internet. That's probably the reason.

GstorychecksoutG

My main point wasnt about win rate ceilings anyway.

Either was mine.

(i.e. it's possible Richard isn't doing nearly as "poorly" as he's being conditioned to think he is)

GcluelesswinratenoobG

the internet isn't anywhere near as anonymous as some people think it is - broadcasting huge win rates could end up getting people in some tricky situations

Hi guys,

Just wanted to say thank you all for the feedback and positive responses. It definitely helps me and I appreciate it all!

Yep.

Not claiming huge win rates. Just saying that I've been taking the game much more seriously and no longer feel comfortable sharing.

Still averaging between 900 - 1,000 hours a year with full time job (that gives me tons of vacation time).

The game is way beatable in the handful of different markets I play in.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

There are a couple of other things I consider besides the ole market/equilibrium thing.

1) The Abyss. Even if you avoid it your whole life, it's part of your true win rate. It's really easy to think that when you had a massive downswing 2 years ago, you weren't playing your A game, or you've started studying harder, so it doesn't count, and your true win rate is this year's. But it does count and it could happen again.

2) So where's your yacht? This is something Limon said regarding online players who thought they could make $600/hr at commerce.

Some elite players do seem to have the lifestyles to match, but it's very rare to see poker players with lifestyles that match lofty win rates.

Not to pick on him, but I used to be a CLP sub and Dave Tuchman would talk about having a win rate north of $100/hr. Which is over $200k/yr and it would be really easy to avoid taxes on much of that.

Then he'd talk about things like buying his first house in his early 30s. So, during your 20s, you made like 2 million playing poker, but you don't have a pot to piss in. Doesn't seem like a guy with a heroin habbit, so... wha happen?

Now, if you mean I can make X/hr between midnight and 4am on a holiday weekend, that's fine. But I think that's a bit deceptive. When you say I can make x/hr grinding poker, most people think you mean playing as a full time job.

This all seems to apply to everyone who doesn't make a set income and has lots of ups and downs. For example, bartenders or servers might tell you they make like $200-300 a night and $500 on weekends, again, in cash. Probably a few do... if you are hot girl, and you got lucky and landed the best job, etc. etc. But I don't believe bar tending is a job where you can expect to consistently hover around 100k.

What's up live regs?

fish itt

You still sunrunning @ Parx!?