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 11-28-2016, 12:40 PM   #16976
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonchillmatic View Post
Should a winning player have a similar hourly in a 8/16 limit game that they would have in a 1/2 NL game? Will the limit structure greatly reduce skill edge?
My *guess* is that the 2 BB/hr expected good winrate for Limit is thrown around just as loosely as the 10 bb/hr is for NL (i.e. probably a lot more unicorn than most of us would like to admit). I'd also guess the typical winner would have fairly similar hourly winrates in both games, although my guess is 1/2 NL would have less of a cap on potential winrate than 8/16 Limit would.

GbutI'vealsoplayedexactly2sessionsof8/16Limit,sowhatdoIknowG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 01:47 PM   #16977
The Rumor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
The Rumor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wherever my loanshark isn't
Posts: 9,559
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Adding one point beyond where you are at, how many places are there were 8/16 or bigger fixed limit holdem runs? 8/16+ is a decent sized limit game. We're not talking about a game where the seniors come in and trade their $100 for 3 hours. This is not the relevant comparison. I would expect that most places with limit of 8/16 or above would have a higher stakes NL game than 1/2. Someone who can max out the win rate at 8/16 or 1/2 may be better served playing 2/5 NL or comparable PLO games (or higher, if available)

In theory, 8/16 limit should be more profitable than a lot of 1/2 games with a 100 bb buy-in limit, but it's going to be less profitable than lots of other games.
The Rumor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 01:48 PM   #16978
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by iraisetoomuch View Post
With my admittedly limited knowledge of limit games, you should prolly do better at 8/16. 2bb/hour is what a good limit player can make, so that's $32/hour?

Where as most won't make over $16-$20 an hour in a 1/2 NL game.
I highly doubt a good limit player can make $16/hr in 4/8, because if that's the case, there would be more 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 01:50 PM   #16979
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Doesn't make a lot of logical sense.

Why would winning players even play 1/2 NL if they can make same amount of money playing 3/6 limit?
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 02:21 PM   #16980
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,673
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranma4703 View Post
My std deviation is $307/hr at 2/5 over 258 hours this year. Winrate is 93/hour (running hot obviously). $1000 buyin.

At 25 hands an hour, that is 1228/100, or 250bb/100, which seems a little high but standard-ish for a deep game.


^ sqrt(4) = 2

Your stdev "/100" would be 2x your stdev "/25".

Anyways - there is no need to convert to another base for live poker. Leave it "/hr".
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 02:28 PM   #16981
jonchillmatic
temp-banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 399
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rumor View Post
Adding one point beyond where you are at, how many places are there were 8/16 or bigger fixed limit holdem runs? 8/16+ is a decent sized limit game. We're not talking about a game where the seniors come in and trade their $100 for 3 hours. This is not the relevant comparison. I would expect that most places with limit of 8/16 or above would have a higher stakes NL game than 1/2. Someone who can max out the win rate at 8/16 or 1/2 may be better served playing 2/5 NL or comparable PLO games (or higher, if available)

In theory, 8/16 limit should be more profitable than a lot of 1/2 games with a 100 bb buy-in limit, but it's going to be less profitable than lots of other games.
In NY where 1/2 no I s always available and usually 2/5. Considering a move to Phoenix and 8/16, in addition to higher limits seems to always run. Not moving for poker obv but considering switching to limit as my main game.
jonchillmatic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 02:32 PM   #16982
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
I highly doubt a good limit player can make $16/hr in 4/8, because if that's the case, there would be more 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL.
Rake really becomes crushing at 4/8- Limit, even moreso than low stakes NL, so the unicorn rate of 2 BB/hr really ain't remotely realistic. I managed 0.88 BB/hr at my 4/8 Limit game over 466 hours but (a) lol sample size, (b) it had an awesome rake (max $3, I doubt you'll find that anywhere now if you even manage to find a 4/8 Limit game), and (c) it was a kill game (so every 10th hand was 8/16 which really helped overcome the rake).

I would *guess* a much more achievable winrate to shoot for in a Limit game for a typical winning player would be in the 0.5 BB/hr range (?), where BB = big bet (not bb = big blind).

GcluelessLimitwinratesnoobG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 02:37 PM   #16983
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

How would rake be more impacting in 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL?

Rake is fixed in both games, and both are played at similar number of hands per hour.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 02:53 PM   #16984
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
How would rake be more impacting in 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL?

Rake is fixed in both games, and both are played at similar number of hands per hour.
In Limit the resulting pot size is always going to be limited (most games limited to 12 BB stacks = $96 in a 4/8 game due to each street being limited to 3 raises, not counting the rare HU unlimited raise case, and it being *very* rare for all 4 streets to reach maximum raises). NL the pot size isn't going to be limited (more-or-less, even our 1/3 NL game has a max bet size of $700 which is almost never encountered), so just that much more of a chance you'll make bigger pots than in Limit and thus have a better chance at outrunning the rake.

i.e. Good chance most pots in both your 4/8 Limit game and 1/2 NL game reach maximum rake, but just *way* better chance the pot ends up bigger in NL than in Limit.

GimoG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 03:00 PM   #16985
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,673
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

@ limit

You have to be careful about using "BB" and "bb"

BB = big bet = 2bb
bb = big blind

Most of the stuff written about limit suggests ~1BB/hr is a top notch rate. *However, that is typically referring to stakes like 20/40 where your relative rake and tips are fractions of a BB.

GG has a log showing he beat 2/4 limit over thousand + hours... he might be the only one in history to do that.

If you take 2bb / hr from a 20/40 game, assume you win ~2 pots per hour, you pay about 0.5 bb / $10 in rake and tip. Add that back in, the zero sum rate is ~2.5bb / hr.

@ 3/6 limit, your zero sum 2.5bb/hr - $10/hour cost = losing money.

@8/16 limit, your zero sum 2.5bb/hr - $10/hour cost = $10/hr

^there is not proof these numbers accurately transfer, but should give you an idea.

What the discussion is usually trying to figure out is "what is the highest WR / stdev game out there?"

I believe:
- limit O8
- then NLHE
- then LHE

I do believe 2/5 NL is less swingy than playing 20/40 limit for ~equivalent WRs.
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 03:08 PM   #16986
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by bip! View Post
GG has a log showing he beat 2/4 limit over thousand + hours... he might be the only one in history to do that.
And that was *only* because the rake was a good max of $3; simply increasing that max rake to $4 would have made my results breakeven (hence the *devastating* affect rake has at low stakes Limit).

For OP's original questios of comparing 8/16 Limit to 1/2 NL, I would guess a winrate of like $10/hr in either one would be decent, although that would probably (?) be considered more impressive in 8/16 Limit than it would be in 1/2 NL, and also unlikely to be improved upon much in 8/16 Limit (whereas probably more potential to improve upon in 1/2 NL). ETA: But I might really be guessing here too much; anyone around with some impressive 8/16 Limit hours to shine some light?

ETA: Like RP said, if you expected similar winrates in both games, you'd probably expect to see just as many of both (but obviously don't). Probably a lot to do with the wow factor of NL / OMC image of Limit?

GfartingoutguessesG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 03:12 PM   #16987
bip!
Slow Pony
 
bip!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: not on urban dictionary...
Posts: 13,673
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Or I should say:
- NL offers a player to pinch down on variance while remaining ~competitive much more so than limit does. (You don't get to nut peddle in limit and remain competitive)

To me - It also explains why NL survived - which should have "sunk" years ago but it didn't. Your small losing lifetime regs found weak-tight eddies of minimum variance where they can comfortably lose at unnoticeable under-the-pain-threshold rates.
bip! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 03:53 PM   #16988
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobbledygeek View Post
In Limit the resulting pot size is always going to be limited (most games limited to 12 BB stacks = $96 in a 4/8 game due to each street being limited to 3 raises, not counting the rare HU unlimited raise case, and it being *very* rare for all 4 streets to reach maximum raises). NL the pot size isn't going to be limited (more-or-less, even our 1/3 NL game has a max bet size of $700 which is almost never encountered), so just that much more of a chance you'll make bigger pots than in Limit and thus have a better chance at outrunning the rake.

i.e. Good chance most pots in both your 4/8 Limit game and 1/2 NL game reach maximum rake, but just *way* better chance the pot ends up bigger in NL than in Limit.

GimoG


It's simple math though:

4/8 WR = $16/hr

1/2 WR = $16/hr

Both tables play the same number of hands and both have same rake structure.

How would rake be more impacting in one but not another?
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 03:57 PM   #16989
KatoKrazy
Pooh-Bah
 
KatoKrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 4,226
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

IIRC there was a guy who played a bunch of 8/16 limit at CAZ as a challenge and kept up a thread on 2+2, maybe in PGC?
KatoKrazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 04:29 PM   #16990
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
It's simple math though:

4/8 WR = $16/hr

1/2 WR = $16/hr

Both tables play the same number of hands and both have same rake structure.

How would rake be more impacting in one but not another?
I'm guessing you mean 8/16 Limit (since $16/hr is a very unreasonable 4/8 Limit rate)?

But yeah, I guess if you're shipping x/hr in both games, then no difference. The question then becomes whether it is reasonable to expect you can ship x/hr in various games for various x. $16/hr seems not too farfetched for a 1/2 NL game; definitely completely unreasonable for a 4/8 Limit game, and I'm guessing on the upper boundaries of a 8/16 game (but I could be wrong).

GcluelessNLnoobG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 04:33 PM   #16991
The Rumor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
The Rumor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wherever my loanshark isn't
Posts: 9,559
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
How would rake be more impacting in 4/8 limit than 1/2 NL?

Rake is fixed in both games, and both are played at similar number of hands per hour.
Not sure I agree with the second assumption - I'd be interested to see data. I feel like limit is slower because people can chase so many hands. Not many hands taken down preflop or on the flop, and the average low limit game is a zillion ways to the flop. Fewer hands lowers your win rate.

On the former, while the rake is fixed, the average pot size in 1/2 might be higher in a lot of rooms. Hence the % of $ won that is raked is higher in limit.
The Rumor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 04:39 PM   #16992
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rumor View Post
Not sure I agree with the second assumption - I'd be interested to see data. I feel like limit is slower

On the former, while the rake is fixed, the average pot size in 1/2 might be higher in a lot of rooms
I was going to question whether Limit is slower as well due to lots of hands being very multiway / multiple raises per round / and all the way to the river. But then NL really has more tanking / sorting out of big pots / etc. Might be close?

Hmmm, what about this RP: If you're winning x/hr in both games, but then when the rake is increased by $1 in both games you find you you're winning more in one, does that mean the previous rake has more of an affect on one game than the other (even though your winrate in both games is the same)? I think it does but I haven't quite convinced myself... course if you're winning the exact same amount in both games at that rake, then who cares?

GcluelessrakemathnoobG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 04:53 PM   #16993
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I am mostly asking questions because I just don't see how 2 big bets is possible in most limit games.

I guess when people said 2 big bets, they're probably claiming it without consideration of rake and tip.

Whereas someone claiming 8bb/hr in NL, it is typically after rake and tip.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 04:58 PM   #16994
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

We definitely agree there: 2 BB/hr is a pipedream at lowstakes Limit for sure, although if I recall it was an "expected rate" that was often thrown around (recklessly, imo) years ago.

Gifyou'rewinning0.5BB/hratLimit,you'redoingprettygood,imoG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:03 PM   #16995
The Rumor
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
The Rumor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Wherever my loanshark isn't
Posts: 9,559
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Did 2 BB come from online experience or from live higher stakes experience? I'm blanking on where that rule of thumb came from. Certainly it's irrelevant at 2/4, 3/6, 4/8 type of games due to rake.
The Rumor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:07 PM   #16996
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I think it was said long ago when poker boom first started and it was referencing claimed WR of known pros.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:07 PM   #16997
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,884
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Matt Damon told me it was "one big bet an hour, that's it"
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:15 PM   #16998
Richard Parker
banned
 
Richard Parker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Right Side of Variance
Posts: 13,951
*** Official Winrates, bankrolls, and finances ***

I hope I never have to find out what my WR is in limit games.

Although I know that my BR would probably have to be twice as big to achieve same WR comfortably if I move from NL to limit.

Funny how most players probably think it's the opposite.
Richard Parker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:24 PM   #16999
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,407
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Rumor View Post
Did 2 BB come from online experience or from live higher stakes experience?
Yeah, I'm not sure where it came from either. It seemed to be thrown about lots in the Live Low Stakes Limit forum when I hung out there in years past, but then more and more boarders began to question how such terribly raked games could be beaten for that much. I felt highly inadequate at my "1000 hours @ Live 2/4 Limit" post at only 0.5 BB/hr.

ETA: I followed a blog of a professional limit player for quite a while and if I recall correctly (which I may not) I believe he stated that 0.5 BB/hr (even at medium stakes) was a much more reasonable assumption of what could be achieved at Limit. (again, BB = big bets)

Gyeah,that'sright,Iplayed1000hoursmaking$2/hour,lol@meG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2016, 05:49 PM   #17000
ZippyThePinhead
adept
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 926
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobbledygeek View Post
I was going to question whether Limit is slower as well due to lots of hands being very multiway / multiple raises per round / and all the way to the river. But then NL really has more tanking / sorting out of big pots / etc. Might be close?



GcluelessrakemathnoobG
I believe on average at limit you get many more hands per hour than NL.



Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
ZippyThePinhead 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 10:29 PM.


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