Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em live cash games of all stakes.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-19-2014, 07:33 PM   #8051
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,667
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidAdams View Post
I am an aspiring 1/2 live player looking for all the evidence I can get before I start putting in real volume @ live tables. (I have the bankroll and the time if I do attempt to take this seriously.) Is the following graph worth a shred of confidence considering the large discrepancy in volume/skill available on live tables?










What stake is the graph at? I would say you will do fine.
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 07:33 PM   #8052
Duke0424
self-banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Desert
Posts: 13,365
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Just make the proper adjustments
Duke0424 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 07:40 PM   #8053
DavidAdams
centurion
 
DavidAdams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 163
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by bip! View Post
What stake is the graph at? I would say you will do fine.
Stake is predominently 5NL.
DavidAdams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 08:32 PM   #8054
jsmo0th10
adept
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 708
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Shouldn't redline be in the positive?

It seems to me that redline is a crucial element to beating LLSNL.

I'm not an expert on stats and their value, nor online play in general, but it seems that having positive showdown wins with a negative redline would mainly indicate run good?

Sum1 skewl me
jsmo0th10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 08:40 PM   #8055
Parallelflux
adept
 
Parallelflux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 826
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

U got it wrong. Redline at lowstakes are suppose to be negative since most profits come from value-betting.

Also redlines aren't all that important.
Parallelflux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 10:26 PM   #8056
CallMeVernon
COTM Crusher
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Not Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,481
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmo0th10 View Post
Shouldn't redline be in the positive?

It seems to me that redline is a crucial element to beating LLSNL.

I'm not an expert on stats and their value, nor online play in general, but it seems that having positive showdown wins with a negative redline would mainly indicate run good?

Sum1 skewl me
The different lines are explained in the graph. Redline means wins without showdown.

We would not expect that to be positive at LLSNL, because it's filled with calling stations. You would not expect to make money inducing folds. We'd expect winning players to have slightly negative redlines hugely outweighed by showdown wins, which is what that graph appears to show.

Big showdown wins don't necessarily mean run good. That's partially explained by the yellow line. The yellow line being positive means that when stacks go in we have the upper hand, and the yellow line tracks by how much.

What I don't know is whether non-all-in showdowns appear in the yellow line. If they do, then the fact that the blue line is way above the yellow line indicates run good. But the small red line doesn't have much to do with that. And if non-all-in showdowns are not included in the yellow line, then it is tough to look at that graph and determine whether the player has been running exceptionally good.
CallMeVernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 10:34 PM   #8057
Koss
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Playing Recreationally
Posts: 5,994
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Most online 2+2ers seem to have negative redlines. There are a few that flip the script with an aggro monkey super system style, but since live players call too much this style will probably lose live.
Koss is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2014, 10:40 PM   #8058
PokerIsTooEasy
banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,004
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koss View Post
There are a few that flip the script with an aggro monkey super system style, but since live players call too much this style will probably lose live.
Confirmed.
PokerIsTooEasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 12:08 AM   #8059
bm303
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,977
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke0424 View Post
not sure if i missed it bm3 but we need more info on your life situation

is the $600 you have in your poker roll very important to you?
Hey Duke,

$600 doesn't mean much to me. I just really want to be one of those guys who turns their first session into a permanent roll. I did manage to run a $60 buyin up to $1700 over 90ish hours, now sitting on about $600 plus about another $300 on Bovada/ACR/merge. I've run up a few online rolls recently at 2-25NL and 5PLO along with some tournys and SnGs mixed in feel that I am more comfortable online because I am not playing scared money. I don't care about losing if I make reasonable plays since I will have a minimum of 20 full buyins online. Recently, I've passed up a few +EV implied odds spots simply because I did not have the money to be throwing around even if the pot odds and implied odds were great. I always play with a stop loss of $300(I usually buy in for $200) and when I get down I definitely start folding in spots I shouldn't for fear of busting.

I've run into some recent bad variance the last 5 sessions, set over sets, flipping preflop for stacks with gamblers, etc. I did have an 8 session win streak prior to this poor run so I had never really experienced negative variance live, some of which is due to poor play and some just being unlucky.

I am a sophomore in college and just turned 21 this year. I do not have a job but do get a lot of money from my parents, which I don't like spending on poker, even though they are fine with it.

It's not an issue of being able to afford it, rather I would like to prove to myself that I have what it takes to be a winning player at low stakes live poker with the least amount of investment possible. 'Freerolling' with earnings seems like the best way to do it but it may not be practical, especially if I am buying in full each session with a bankroll of roughly 2-3 buyins.

I am willing to go back to short stacking but it is painful seeing those spots where you know you'd have stacked someone if you were deeper. Then again, you can't lose as much short stacked.

Last edited by bm303; 10-20-2014 at 12:19 AM.
bm303 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 01:15 AM   #8060
Duke0424
self-banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: The Desert
Posts: 13,365
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Unfortunately, running up a small bankroll relies heavily on factors that are out of your control
Duke0424 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 12:24 PM   #8061
jesse123
adept
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,078
Typical Run Bad?

What's the largest number of hours that you run bad in a typical year? What the longest stretch of hours where you show no profit or are in the red? 40 hours? 100 hours? 200 hours? I'm just wondering what normal hourly variance is.

(note to mods - I tried posting this question in BBV and couldn't get a serious answer. Please do not move)
jesse123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 12:31 PM   #8062
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,366
Re: Typical Run Bad?

I'm guessing this more belongs in the winrates thread.

Gcurrentlyina~150hourbreakevenstretchG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 12:39 PM   #8063
Playbig2000
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Playbig2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,521
Re: Typical Run Bad?

it depends on what level a player you are. Are you playing +EV winning poker? I have heard good players who had bad runs over 1,000 hours but if you are just below break even, it could be indefinite.
Playbig2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 01:19 PM   #8064
Koss
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Playing Recreationally
Posts: 5,994
Re: Typical Run Bad?

I am currently 500bb down over 50 hours after 100 hour 1500bb heater. This game is brutal. Find some online players downswings and when you convert hands to hours it can be really depressing.
Koss is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 02:47 PM   #8065
fitzthetaxman
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 768
Re: Typical Run Bad?

hunnneds obv.
fitzthetaxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 03:11 PM   #8066
johnnyBuz
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
johnnyBuz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Beast Coast
Posts: 7,092
Re: Typical Run Bad?

More than I'd like to believe is possible.
johnnyBuz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 03:50 PM   #8067
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,883
Re: Typical Run Bad?

I've gone on a 100 hour downswing, and spent over a year basically treading water, 500 hours maybe. This is playing mostly weekends and evenings as a semi-rec player. (Longer sessions on weekends, short 2-3 hours sessions some evenings).
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 04:14 PM   #8068
11t
Bo Pelini's #1 Fan
 
11t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewville
Posts: 31,421
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Life pro tip: get a job bar tending during college and don't play cards all the time
11t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 07:52 PM   #8069
PokerIsTooEasy
banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,004
Re: Typical Run Bad?

I had a losing session once.
PokerIsTooEasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 09:03 PM   #8070
fitzthetaxman
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 768
Re: Typical Run Bad?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerIsTooEasy View Post
I had a losing session once.
Well played.
fitzthetaxman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-20-2014, 09:33 PM   #8071
Flushie
centurion
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Upstate- NY
Posts: 159
Re: Typical Run Bad?

Just had my first win session after my longest run bad downswing in a year and a half of ....7 sessions of 100+hours for about 2 large
Flushie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 02:20 AM   #8072
Aleksei
adept
 
Aleksei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Inside your mom
Posts: 1,116
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by jsmo0th10 View Post
Shouldn't redline be in the positive?

It seems to me that redline is a crucial element to beating LLSNL.

I'm not an expert on stats and their value, nor online play in general, but it seems that having positive showdown wins with a negative redline would mainly indicate run good?

Sum1 skewl me
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallelflux View Post
U got it wrong. Redline at lowstakes are suppose to be negative since most profits come from value-betting.

Also redlines aren't all that important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CallMeVernon View Post
The different lines are explained in the graph. Redline means wins without showdown.

We would not expect that to be positive at LLSNL, because it's filled with calling stations. You would not expect to make money inducing folds. We'd expect winning players to have slightly negative redlines hugely outweighed by showdown wins, which is what that graph appears to show.

Big showdown wins don't necessarily mean run good. That's partially explained by the yellow line. The yellow line being positive means that when stacks go in we have the upper hand, and the yellow line tracks by how much.

What I don't know is whether non-all-in showdowns appear in the yellow line. If they do, then the fact that the blue line is way above the yellow line indicates run good. But the small red line doesn't have much to do with that. And if non-all-in showdowns are not included in the yellow line, then it is tough to look at that graph and determine whether the player has been running exceptionally good.
It's not just that people are call stations.

The primary reason why your redline will basically always be negative if you're a winning player, and should be negative, is that the majority of your non-showdown losses are little more than you folding the blinds.

For instance, I'm a pretty aggro player, and I play in an environment that is somewhat tight for micros. Despite this, I still have a similar redline to yours, -13bb/100. This is my 5NL graph for the month of October:



However, if you filter out hands that I folded preflop, my non-showdown results look more like this:



A lot of that is from getting folds with value hands. A fair bit of it is from bluffs. Regardless, the point is that in hands where I didn't just fold the BB, I've basically broken even. It's just that as a winning player you are going to give up your blind a lot, and that counts against your redline.

Yeah yeah I know I've been running good. I also ran pretty bad at 10NL and 2NL, so it evens out.
Aleksei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2014, 11:27 AM   #8073
CallMeVernon
COTM Crusher
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Not Vancouver, BC
Posts: 3,481
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Good point. I'd also expect that at LLSNL, you're going to see more flops than in an online game (but as someone who's not an online player I'm just guessing about the frequency of limping or cold-calling a raise online), so limping and then folding the flop would also drive down your redline.
CallMeVernon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014, 12:34 AM   #8074
JagenGeist
journeyman
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 235
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

What is a better game to play ( assuming player skill level is static)

A 1/2 game with a 100bb avg stack with a 5+1 10% max rake

OR a 1/3 game with 100bb avg stack and a 6+1 10% max rake?
JagenGeist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2014, 12:58 AM   #8075
iraisetoomuch
banned
 
iraisetoomuch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,453
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

1/3.

One game maxes out at 3 bb / per hand.
The other maxes out at 2.33 bb / hand.

I suppose it also depends on raise sizes a bit too.
If raise sizes at the 1/3 game are the same as raise sizes at a 1/2 game it might make less of a difference. But then it would just play like a deeper 1/2 game.
Regardless, if skill level really is the same then the 1/3 game is almost certainly going to be better imo.
iraisetoomuch is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive