[QUOTE=bstillmatic;48182271] Most experts say you need to know at least 75 out of 100 things to crush the live 1/2 games in Vegas. But some say it only takes 50 out of 100 things. The really creative thinkers argue that there are in fact 112 things to know and that knowing even just one of the elusive 12 will let you beat Vegas 1/2 for $40/hr.

The thing is, some guys have enough disposable income to punt off $4k/mo at poker without batting an eye. And they sit in local $1/2 games. They're "regs" and they're really ****ing bad, but they don't care because the money isn't enough to matter to them. They just enjoy ****ing around playing cards, drinking, and bluffing people.

So to us they might be consistently losing a lot of money. But they don't see it that way and keep playing.

500bb with just a pair is insanely high variance.

Anyhow, everyone in this forum wants to believe that LLSNL is an ATM, and that's just not true.

The juicy nightgames here typically have 2 bad tightish players who are definite losers during the day but are modest winners in this game (5-10BB/hr?), one crusher who is making more than these two players combined, and 7 modest to huge losers. Throw in the odd whale who regularly dusts off 500-750BB in a couple of hours and you have yourself a game.

6 players losing 60bb/hour between all of them, right? So -10bb/hour each. Seems reasonable.

Claims that there are just piles of 10bb/hr LLSNL winners... yet I have seen ONE graph ITT of 1k+ hrs that shows > 10bb / hr at 1/3.

Crushing LLSNL is rare even among posters ITT. Like the guy who posted up thread "recently learned everyone is winning less than I thought"

Hey guys,

As promised, here are my stats from my first full year of being a "live pro". I started out playing nights and weekend exclusively, but moved to playing the local early morning-afternoon games for around 3/4s of my total volume.

1/2nl (150bb w opt straddle)
$18/hr over 1181hrs w StdDev $515

1/3nl (Vegas only)
$33/hr over 150hrs w StdDev $526

1/2/5nl (100bb w opt$10 straddle)
$40/hr over 48hrs w StdDev $935

2/5nl (200bb w opt straddle)
$44/hr over 56hrs w StdDev $482

1/2plo (no max w opt straddle)
$48/hr over 30hrs w StdDev of $295

Really made some great improvement over the course of the year. Learned a lot about game selecting and times to play. Daytime winrate is lower than weekend, but still a beatable game that is always running and allows for a more normal schedule - so I'm okay with that.

Describing deep stack games in BB/hr is not really fair though IMO. Should be relative to your buyin.

Edit: My sample size is small though, so I might very well be completely FOS

Lol I'm not saying anyone can go into any game and beat it for 10bb/hr. But it's definitely attainable for a good player. All that being said, I have never sat at a table with a player I thought was capable of beating the game for 10bb/hr. So I would agree that those players are incredibly rare, moreso than the impression one would get from this thread.

Since the bulk of your sample was 1/2 I'll ask about that. What were you buying in for? If it varied, please elaborate. What was your largest downswing in bbs, how long in hours did it last? How many 500bb+ downswings did you go through?

I would think the reason you don't see 10 BB/hr winners over 1000 hours is because people running 10+ are moving up before they hit 1000 hours (at least at 1/2 or 1/3)

If you say there are 35 hands per hour, and a 2 BB/hand rake that's shared equally by 9 players, a 10 BB/hr win rate works out to about 50 BB/100. With 1 BB/hand of rake, it's 39 BB/100. Those are awfully high numbers to hit, especially if you're playing 100 BBs deep most hands.

+1

I posted my 1/3 NL giraffes at 1000 hours (9.65 bb/hr) and 2000 hours (9.44 bb/hr), but now at 2418 hours I've lost a full bb/hr off my overall winrate (8.36 bb/hr) which is alarming given the short period of time it has plummeted. Even looking at my overall giraffe, it's becoming clear to me that there was just too long of a good rungood period that has completely thrown off my confidence in my winrate, and I'm sure when the dust settles I will be envious of a 7.00 bb/hr one. And of course all the usual stuff about changing conditions, blah blah blah plus I suck at poker.

Cliffs: Autopiloting for 10 bb/hr is a pipe dream, imo.

GcallsthemgiraffescuzIthinkthat'sfunny,I'msoeasily amusedG

A lot of markets don't have higher games.

GcluelessmarketnoobG

I don't know. Assuming the decent player, TAG auto-pilot and break even player each play 8 hours, 5 days a week, they each get about 160 hours a month. In order to maintain their win rates, the 6 other players need to lose 10bb/he for that amount of time. That means on average, each other player at the table is losing $3200 a month. Assuming the average loser is willing to lose $600/month, that would mean you'd need 30 players losing $600 a month in that player pool.

The biggest reason is probably that 10+ bb/hr over 1000 hour winners don't see the need to log on to twoplustwo to post their graphs.

Oh no, there might be a new buzz description being created in this forum: TAG autopilot.

Whoever thinks that such type exist is oblivious.

it's more complicated than that

1) winrates are not linear or even close to it.

a 10bb/h winner at 2/5 might only be able to make a 3bb winrate in a typical 5/10 player pool which actually means a lower winrate with a much higher risk of ruin within a bankroll and much higher variance

2) it isn't always worth it to move up due to money allocation

a proper 2/5 roll with living expenses is around 20k at the basement assuming around a 7 or more bb/h edge and 120 hours of work a month with expenses totaling around 1k. this gives a very low change or ruin and a good buffer for savings.

in order to create the same model for a 5/10 player due to the deeper buy ins, higher variance and generally higher cost of living due to the economy of scales you notice the amount of money you need set aside to make 8bb at 5/10 is like 60k, much much higher, and the risk of ruin (having to move down) is much higher. factor in that the games don't always run and a lot of pros don't find it worth the financial tie ups or stress to move up at all.

in the right market an absolute crusher makes 10-13bbs at 2/5, a lot of such guys are fine with no risk of going broke and a stress free 4-6k a month.



also about the 1000 hours people move up thing 1000 hours even at 50 an hour is still only 50k and thats assuming no expenses, so call it 35k and that isn't exactly a 5/10 roll


on top of that the skill sets that make a good 5/10 winner are so different that the learning curve can be so expensive/sometimes impossible that a lot of guys don't ever try, which might be obvious but it's another thing to consider.

also I want to weigh in on the reg thing because I got into this argument the other day: among my friends reg is another name for a pro, rec or regfish is a name for someone who plays all the time, special guest is whale, old guy is another word for guy who is regular but not pro

the reason we use reg as pro and not for other people is that when you are giving hand histories usually the subject is a fish or weaker player so you try to be as specific as possible to make your decisions clearer where as most regs are A) similar enough in play style unless otherwise stated B) probably good enough to where you have to assume the hands you have in your sample aren't enough to be able to call them anything but reg.

in the same way that it's better to play vacuum poker verses good players and exploit bad ones

People move up - but I would say it is a mixed bag of motivations and results before moving up. (i.e. Fish move up when they get more comfortable or go on a short heater - lots never drop back)

There are a decent # of people who play 1000+ hrs of LLSNL over a year or two... few track results, very few win, and there are very rare birds winning 10bb/hr +

Despite 2/5 being a tougher limit, there are probably more 10bb/hr winners in that game than 1/3 & 1/2.

I totally agree...

...but, there are cases where it is a simple as there are no other games/stakes in that market.

Gforinstance,myroomoffers1/3NLandthat'stheonlycashgamegoing99.9%ofthetimeG

LOL I didn't create the term KM used it. I'm doing my best to work with that description, just like I do to work with the descriptions given in strat threads like "He's a standard TAG done right: Limps UTG". I take TAG autopilot to mean a very rigid preflop range, won't 3bet light, will bet/fold relentlessly, etc... He's not going to think on an extraordinary high level but he knows the basics. I'm thinking he plays something like an online multi tabler.

Ummm...what?

How does winrate not being linear has anything to do with someone who do not have the same winrate in different stakes?

$35 x 120 - 1000 = $3200.

Lots of rambling, but I don't actually see any comprehensible argument to how it isn't better to move up if WR remains relatively constant and BR is not an issue.

Please clarify.


Stop using random numbers to fill in variables then make very straight forward conclusions off such result.

There are variables because...wide range of scenarios.

So now the argument is that 2/5 player may not win as much moving up, hence one shouldn't move up?

You could just lead with that and end all discussion.

Oh absolutely. People who are motivated enough to beat a level for 10bb/hr would not be doing it for $20/hr.

Yep, whatever you win in session #1 divide by hours spent = your hourly from that point forward until end of time.