Again, that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

Then I misunderstood you apparently. I wouldn't mind a graph that shows my results per hour instead of per session. But the problem remains it wouldn't actually be results per hour, since individual hours aren't tracked because I enter my data in "sessions" and one session typically consists of multiple hours. So how would the graph know if it should go up or down from hour 1 to 2 for instance?

I still wouldn't mind if it was the same graph as the "per session" graph, but with hours instead of sessions on the X-axis, but the graph wouldn't mean anything. And the app does show your results per hour in the stats, that's all you need, right?

I don't know, perhaps I still don't understand what you're trying to say.

Yeah hours on X axis because then we can actually guage a sample size.

Just started playing 1/2, 1/3, 2/3 semi-recreationally with 187 hours logged and am currently +$1444 winning 39/64 sessions. $7.68/hr. I understand there’s still a lot on my game I need to work on, but for those that are crushing/doing well, how consistently are you guys winning? I’m concerned with how volatile my sessions can be that there are several and urgent leaks in my game that need to be addressed quickly. Any feedback would be much appreciated. Thanks!

You could probably read thru some of the Winrates thread, although it's a pretty long read and might actually be difficult to weed out why exactly you're looking for.

If you're asking about your session winrate (i.e. how many winning vs losing sessions you are having) a lot of that is dependent on session length, whether you hit and run, etc. It's kinda probably mostly meaningless.

If you're asking about how your winrate stacks up, so far it's positive, which is good considering the majority of players who play are losing players.

But overall, you've played 187 hours, a lol small sample size where results will be beyond meaningless.

Best method is often to read some literature, post / respond to threads, play (taking into account anything useful you think you may have picked up and see how you think it applies to your game), and then repeat over and over and over again until you die.

Ggoodluck!G

Welcome to 2+2!

My story. I played 1/3 for several years prior to having kids with a consistent but small win rate ($15-20/hr). I just took 4 years off and started playing again this fall. My game has improved dramatically as I've matured a lot, learned to control tilt, and manage my image more in the games I play. But I've only played about 100hrs since being back in the game and have run super hot. I'm up a little over $5500 in 100hrs.

If you are looking for % sessions won, that will depend a lot on the factors mentioned by GG. But I think that a lot of consistent winners will have 70-80% winning sessions over a larger sample size. No-one wins 100%. But whatever your stats are will by massively influenced by things like stop-loss triggers. (I personally have a 200bb stop-loss). I find it unlikely that I am playing my best game after losing two buy-ins and so opt for the early night if that happens.

So far my session stats are either I win ($xx - $yyyy) or lose 200bbs

He should read your thread.

Winning 80 percent of sessions is great. Winning 67 percent is above average.

OP your hourly isn’t great but you are winning.

Keep reading here and reading books and it should improve


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What's your rake and average stack size? In some parts of the country, min wage is a good w/r for the lowest stakes.

Also +2 to: small sample size, winrates thread, GG's thread.

Pretty confident in saying that less than 1% of players win 70% of their sessions long term with 80% probably never happening. I'm winning 10bb/hr over 970 hrs and only have won 61% of sessions.

Edit: this is assuming average session length is 3-4 hrs. I guess if every session you play is 12 hrs, then 80% might be possible.

Well my friend is a 2/5 pro and she’s at 80. Her friend is higher.

I am not that good and I’m at 67ish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I was assuming that we would be playing longer sessions than 3 hrs. My average session is more like 8 hrs. Of course, quitting tendencies will play a large roll (I like to quit while I'm ahead). So if I'm up 150bb's and take a 50bb loss within an hour of my session time I'll often just book the win if I'm feeling done with the night.

I actually think that leaning to quit/take a break when frustrated has been my single biggest improvement during my time off from poker. I used to think muscling through the negative moments was the sign of a good player, but I think I was just tilting too much.

Welcome to 2+2!

Small sample, low hourly but positive, so congrats on the good start. As others have said, check the hands posted in the LLSNL thread, read whatever u can. 2+2 mag articles are free, Andrew Brokos usually has a monthly article.

One thing to think about when playing $1-$3 NL is how often u are completing or calling from the SB. Playing too frequently from that spot is a leak. Same for other stakes, but $1-$3 costs twice as much.

Imho, the win rate % is not as critical as focusing on growing your hourly. There will be sessions where u simply can’t do much – card dead, more playable hands oop, table dynamics, etc. Lose small pots, win bigger pots is good mantra to keep in mind.

GL!

Yup, this belongs in the Winrates thread. I'm on my phone at the moment, but if another mod doesn't move it first, I'll get it when I get home and you can continue the discussion.

And moved and re-opened...

I'd expect winning players to book wins in 60% to 80% of their live sessions, probably 65%+ at the 1/2 level. I book a very high winning percentage but I also don't like to leave as a loser meaning I will grind longer just to book a win which makes this stat completely meaningless for me.

The thing you really need to understand is that being a good poker player takes hard work and experience. With only 187 hours under you belt it's impossible for you to be very good at poker. You most certainly have numerous leaks that you don't even know about. The good news is that despite being at an experience disadvantage you have had success. Just keep looking for ways to improve and you should do fine.

Same here, I'm winning 11bb/hr over my last 1000 hours, but still winning only 60% of my sessions. This year I'm at 13bb/hr over 400 hours, with a mere 56% (average length is under 5 hours). So I'm guessing your winning percentage is sort of meaningless.

I'm much less concerned these days about "booking a win", so my w% is like 55% but my WR as a whole is still much higher then it was years ago when my w% was like 65%. Meaningless stat imo, especially all the sessions you win/lose less then like 30bb, only the amount of time you spend at the table after that point will determine if its a win for the "session". And I'm not in the business of grinding an extra hour to pad my stats.

I guess what's more important is that when you do win, you win more than you lose when you lose. I think anywhere between 55-75% for live 2/5 is normal. 80 is prob lolsample or majority sample running very good.

Some more data on session win % - Year to date
Hours 956
Average session length 8.85 hours
67% sessions are winning
9.85bb/ hour

I never vary my session length based on winning or losing that session. I work full time, so only way to get poker hours in is to play as much as possible when my schedule permits.




Sent from my SM-G955U1 using Tapatalk

The rake is $6 and $7 if it goes to the river. I usually play 2/3 with a 100-300 max. Stack depth varies from like $40-$800, but usually I'll see a mix of $150ish stacks to a couple $500+ stacks and those that have like $40 left lol.

Rake / stacks in my game is quite similar. It's not a great rake for stacks this mediocre, especially if stacks aren't flying in a lot in lol fashion. In a "bad" game (i.e. a lotta of semi-solid players with only a couple/few poor players), any positive longterm winrate would be a good one, imo.

GgoodluckG

So I completely agree in the idea that winning percentage is completely useless, but in regards to the 30bb comment I feel like my sessions have either resulted in 30-50 bb wins with the occasional 100-175 bb win or a 100-200 bb loss. Granted my sessions don't last very long (2-3 hours) due to work and other priorities, but is there just a huge leak that I'm just not accounting for with these small wins coupled with massive losses?

Prolly just a very small sample size in general, compounded from the fact that your session lengths are very small, so very hard to make any assumptions from the data you've given.

I know for me the only difference between a massive losing session and massive winning one is typically the outcome of like 2 or 3 hands; this would be especially true the shorter your sessions are (where 1 hand could easily be the deciding factor).

More the question to be concerned about is how you're getting your money into big pots. If you're mostly doing it as the favourite or with reasonable expected FE (sometimes coupled with a decent draw) then you're probably doing alright. If you're mostly doing it as an underdog, especially in hands that shouldn't be considered coolers, then you probably have something to be concerned about.

GcluelessNLnoobG

Thanks for this input. I try to remind myself of how shallow and short my time of playing poker has been thus far and completely agree with your statements. I have been getting the money in as a decent favorite most of the time but just end up losing the pot.

88 vs AQss (flop top set on the flop, lose to flush on the turn = $800ish pot)
64hh vs 88 (flop top pair plus straight draw plus flush draw, turn two pair, lose on river to paired board = $800ish pot)
JJ vs KTo (flop a set, lose to runner runner straight = $600ish pot)

Some pretty gross spots, but it's negative variance I'm assuming? Still learning, but thanks again for this insight!