Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
View Poll Results: What is your Win Rate in terms of BB per Housr
Less than 0 (losing)
5 6.76%
0-2.5
0 0%
2.5-5
6 8.11%
5-7.5
7 9.46%
7.5-10
15 20.27%
10+
24 32.43%
Not enough sample size/I don't know
17 22.97%

10-28-2019 , 07:25 PM
Winrates are results; and results speak. I don't discard small samples in my own games because I remember exactly what happened; every mistake and every fortunate or unfortunate run out. Honestly, there's very rarely a session or tournament I didn't make any mistakes. Very rare. And I'm profitable. Occasionally I get lucky (and luck isn't just about sucking out); occasionally not so lucky.

As for live play, I also don't see the point in asking a person (or measuring yourself against that person) as to what their win rate is; unless u play specifically in the game they play in; against the same players etc. Even then the only point of that is to try and adopt some of their strategies because you believe it will improve your results.

Nor do I see the value of a winrate based on stakes, again, unless u play in those same player pools/limits that you're measuring against. Not all games are equal. Not all players are equal. It's why some of us play this game.

The question isn't: "What should my winrate be?"
The question is: "What can I do, to maximize my winrate?"
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
The point is that, on average, the 9 players are going to break even except for what they pay in rake, tips and cocktails.
Actually I think this is something where most would disagree.

FWIW, this is not the main point though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
But I think your point is important. I assume you mean, we should consider what recreational players are losing.
Yes for most part. I think win rate is a byproduct of what most players at the table are willing to lose, but apparently there is not a definitive coined term to such number.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
Usually when I think about this, it pushes my guesses about the win rates of winning players down.
That's one of the reasons why I think such discussion is more honest, because players might exaggerate how much they win, but it seems that there is less rationale to exaggerate how much average losers are willing to lose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
When there is a poker boom-- when poker is introduced to an area, a lot of really clueless players will be in the game. But after a while, they get sick of losing, go broke, their wives found out that they lost $10,000 over the last few months, poker won't be novel anymore, etc. Some will improve.

When everything settles down, you can ask if it seems reasonable that there is a steady stream of regulars who drop $60/hr in a 1/3 game for years, or whatever the number might be.
Agreed, and I think that number would have strong correlation to how much a crusher can win in that game.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AintNodaisy
Winrates are results; and results speak. I don't discard small samples in my own games because I remember exactly what happened; every mistake and every fortunate or unfortunate run out. Honestly, there's very rarely a session or tournament I didn't make any mistakes. Very rare. And I'm profitable. Occasionally I get lucky (and luck isn't just about sucking out); occasionally not so lucky.

As for live play, I also don't see the point in asking a person (or measuring yourself against that person) as to what their win rate is; unless u play specifically in the game they play in; against the same players etc. Even then the only point of that is to try and adopt some of their strategies because you believe it will improve your results.

Nor do I see the value of a winrate based on stakes, again, unless u play in those same player pools/limits that you're measuring against. Not all games are equal. Not all players are equal. It's why some of us play this game.

The question isn't: "What should my winrate be?"
The question is: "What can I do, to maximize my winrate?"
This is true. The thing is that some people think that the maximum possible win rate is "X". Other people think its "X times 2" or whatever.

The people that think its "X" already think they are maximizing their win rate and that they don't need to do anything differently because its impossible to win at a higher rate.

<head in sand>

I happen to think that if I'm at "X times 2" then there must be more I can do to get to "X times 2.5".
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AintNodaisy

As for live play, I also don't see the point in asking a person (or measuring yourself against that person) as to what their win rate is; unless u play specifically in the game they play in; against the same players etc. Even then the only point of that is to try and adopt some of their strategies because you believe it will improve your results.

Nor do I see the value of a winrate based on stakes, again, unless u play in those same player pools/limits that you're measuring against. Not all games are equal. Not all players are equal. It's why some of us play this game.

The question isn't: "What should my winrate be?"
The question is: "What can I do, to maximize my winrate?"
This is true if you are basically committed to playing X amount of poker no matter what.

If you are deciding how much, if any poker to play because you want to make money, it is useful to know what the potential win rates are in general or in a particular area or game. Just like if you were deciding if you wanted to drive for Uber or set up an ebay store.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
When there is a poker boom-- when poker is introduced to an area, a lot of really clueless players will be in the game. But after a while, they get sick of losing, go broke, their wives found out that they lost $10,000 over the last few months, poker won't be novel anymore, etc. Some will improve.

When everything settles down, you can ask if it seems reasonable that there is a steady stream of regulars who drop $60/hr in a 1/3 game for years, or whatever the number might be.
Also note, there could be instances where when players do settle down into some sort of symbiotic circle, and a crusher comes in and disrupts the player pool and walking away like a bandit.

Although I don't think such disruption could be long-term without significant change to the player pool, which could lead to its extinction depending on the size of pool.

I think that's how PLO killed a lot of smaller rooms.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
This is true if you are basically committed to playing X amount of poker no matter what.

If you are deciding how much, if any poker to play because you want to make money, it is useful to know what the potential win rates are in general or in a particular area or game. Just like if you were deciding if you wanted to drive for Uber or set up an ebay store.
Agreed - basically evaluating one's opportunity cost.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanqueray
Actually I think this is something where most would disagree.

FWIW, this is not the main point though.
Just for the sake of clarity, this is what I and I think the others mean.

Let's make it HU to KIS. I play Ivey and we both buy in for $1,000. I play a trained monkey and we both buy in for $1,000.

Either way, at the end of the session, the average player will have $2,000/2.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeStarr
This is true. The thing is that some people think that the maximum possible win rate is "X". Other people think its "X times 2" or whatever.

The people that think its "X" already think they are maximizing their win rate and that they don't need to do anything differently because its impossible to win at a higher rate.

<head in sand>

I happen to think that if I'm at "X times 2" then there must be more I can do to get to "X times 2.5".
100% agree. Funny how there's alot of talk about not being results oriented; but in the same breath focusing on winrates (which is a result) and what it could/maybe/should/might be.

I play a fair amount of small stakes limit games (because it's what's most available to me without significant travel) and most of these games shift/change promos at certain times of the year etc. But the profit line can get significantly cut if/when the promo changes to something less optimal; than what it was before, and can seriously impact the winrate.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
This is true if you are basically committed to playing X amount of poker no matter what.

If you are deciding how much, if any poker to play because you want to make money, it is useful to know what the potential win rates are in general or in a particular area or game. Just like if you were deciding if you wanted to drive for Uber or set up an eBay store.
My argument is that a potential win/rate doesn't matter, because win-rates are results. Whatever the win rate or loss-rate, each individual player is responsible. And no player can project the win-rate without getting in there; it's irrelevant... Especially if you start out as most players as in unable to beat the game.

Interestingly there was an article I read recently about Uber; and that female drivers make more tips than male drivers. If you happen to drive for Uber and be male, you could gnash you fists at the universe, and for the unfairness of driving for Uber, or you could quit, or you could ask yourself... How would I look with some hair extensions and some make up?

Now if driving for Uber was your passion... You'd at least consider option 3.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 07:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanqueray
One should expect these guys to say certain things, borderline clickbait.

Plus neither of them have put in significant amount of hours in LLSNL in probably forever.

Certain win rate is achievable as long as loss rate from other players are there. Postle's win rate was insane, but what was more absurd is the loss rate of those players in Sacramento. That game probably had the highest loss rate of any casino in the US.


To be fair, if you’re a player playing in this game and you go home and look at Postle’s play after the fact, you’re either thinking (1) he’s cheating or (2) he’s a ****ing maniac, I’m going to play in this game until he makes the wrong move at the wrong time and I’m gonna take all his moneys.

Problem with #2 was that the player wasn’t good enough to be thinking #1, so those players just kept playing and playing and waiting and waiting but the time to stack him never came because of obvious 20/20 reasons.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ES2
Just for the sake of clarity, this is what I and I think the others mean.

Let's make it HU to KIS. I play Ivey and we both buy in for $1,000. I play a trained monkey and we both buy in for $1,000.

Either way, at the end of the session, the average player will have $2,000/2.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe others were talking about the "loss rate" the same way as the rake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanBostick
The average loss per player is going to be a measure of the rake dropped, nothing more nor less.
$5 average rake per hand, 30 hands per hour = $150 raked off the table every hour.

9 players at the table, $150/9 = $16.67/hr in loss rate per player.

-$16.67 + $50 (win on average not considering rake, in which none of us would actually know the number of) = $33.33/hr won or aka win rate.

I don't think anyone is actually implying that everyone just sit around in a circle for 5 hours, pay the rake, and go home with basically the same amount of money they started with minus the rake. If that's what we think of poker is, then shush...what am I doing here?
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:09 PM
FWIW, I would think the following terms are represented in this relationship:

-Win rate: net cash out divided by hours played.
-Rake rate: how much casino rakes per hand on average.
-Loss rate: how much someone loses after cashing out (if they do cash out) divided by hours played.

I do not think rake matters as much, just like how most when they share their win rate in this thread, they don't automatically share what the casino rake is.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanqueray
FWIW, I would think the following terms are represented in this relationship:

-Win rate: net cash out.
-Rake rate: how much casino rakes.
-Loss rate: how much someone loses after cashing out (if they do cash out).
So if someone felts; and doesn't cash out... It doesn't impact their loss rate? I'm putting this in my results... My winrate is going WAy! Up!

(sarcasm)
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AintNodaisy
So if someone felts; and doesn't cash out... It doesn't impact their loss rate? I'm putting this in my results... My winrate is going WAy! Up!

(sarcasm)
LOL, it's funny but I do know a few people who don't count all the losses in their "record keeping."
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:14 PM
Rake matters. It impacts win-rate and loss-rate and whether games can be beaten over the long term. There is no debate.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanqueray
LOL, it's funny but I do know a few people who don't count all the losses in their "record keeping."
As do I. People like to falsify their abilities, not understanding that one of the most important things in poker is to be honest with yourself.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 08:17 PM
Of course rake matters, and I did not express myself clearly in such matter.

Point is, when people share their win rate, they don't automatically share what the average rake is in their casino(s).

So when discussing this other rate in which losing players lose on average, the rake is implied and included, but less noteworthy.

Blah, I think somehow my message got lost somewhere. Only point I was trying to make is that:

Player A can exaggerate he wins 20bb/hr, but player A probably won't exaggerate how much most players in his player pool lose per hour. That is all.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-28-2019 , 09:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanqueray
I don't think anyone is actually implying that everyone just sit around in a circle for 5 hours, pay the rake, and go home with basically the same amount of money they started with minus the rake. If that's what we think of poker is, then shush...what am I doing here?
That's exactly what happens as a collective...

The amount of money on the table stays the same until someone gets up or buys back in again.
The only reason it changes is that money comes off to rake (tips, etc).

The difference is that Player A is losing $50/hour, B is losing $40/hour, Player D is winning $30/hour etc etc.

But their average loss rate is exactly equal to rake+tips+promo+cocktail.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 09:04 AM
I think people are talking past each other here. There are two "average loss rates" being discussed.

IRTM and others are talking about the cost to play, which will come off of the top, spread over all players to get an average. Let's call this "cost rate."

Tanqueray and others are talking about how spewy the game is on average, in other words, how much losing players are contributing to winning players on average. Let's call this "donation rate."
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 09:04 AM
what would you guys say is the upper bound of beatable rake in a 1/2 game assuming unknown table dynamics

let's say you're traveling abroad and will be at a casino, you don't know what the field will be like but the rake is posted on the website
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 09:28 AM
I mean, people make money in Oz with 10% capped at $15, but the game sure has to be spewy to be able to do that. I'd at least go to the venues and communities forum and see if the game is off the hook before I'd sit at anything capped over $10.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 11:15 AM
1/3 game
No flop no drop
all flops +1 for "free food & drinks"
all flops +1 for high hand bonus IIRC it's every half hour or so
5% rake with $13 max drop (add on the surcharges and it's $15 max)

they are offering free hotel room (if I bring a roommate) + $30 a night for playing during evening hours and food/drinks would all be free if i ate my meals while playing

considering it because I'm winding down self employment and going to start seeking regular employment and this could be a nice paid or break even vacation

theoretical downside - need friends who actually play poker profitably (taken buddies with me to Macau before and it never ended well)

actual downside - rake seems unbeatable, especially so if there are a lot of cbet folds on the flop where a $20 pot gets the $1 rake at 5% taken out then tripled via food/beverage and high hand fees

99% of live play was in Macau back when the games made considering rake a needless exercise - hence my idiocy in these matters

this is in Panama City IIRC, would have to consult the emails again from a few months back - assuming the offer still stands but don't want to initiate contact again if it's a no go

I'm down to travel and all and understand that worst case scenario, a losing session at 1-3 probably cheaper than hotel room and food bills would be anyway, but would tilt my face having to reach my min hours if i got there are realized how unbeatable it was - i would be absolutely miserable flying down there and then finding myself just folding and listening to audiobooks wondering why i got involved in this - don't want to become one of those miserable prop players clocking in and hating life

Last edited by rickroll; 10-29-2019 at 11:23 AM.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickroll
1/3 game
No flop no drop
all flops +1 for "free food & drinks"
all flops +1 for high hand bonus IIRC it's every half hour or so
5% rake with $13 max drop (add on the surcharges and it's $15 max)

they are offering free hotel room (if I bring a roommate) + $30 a night for playing during evening hours and food/drinks would all be free if i ate my meals while playing

considering it because I'm winding down self employment and going to start seeking regular employment and this could be a nice paid or break even vacation

theoretical downside - need friends who actually play poker profitably (taken buddies with me to Macau before and it never ended well)

actual downside - rake seems unbeatable, especially so if there are a lot of cbet folds on the flop where a $20 pot gets the $1 rake at 5% taken out then tripled via food/beverage and high hand fees

99% of live play was in Macau back when the games made considering rake a needless exercise - hence my idiocy in these matters

this is in Panama City IIRC, would have to consult the emails again from a few months back - assuming the offer still stands but don't want to initiate contact again if it's a no go

I'm down to travel and all and understand that worst case scenario, a losing session at 1-3 probably cheaper than hotel room and food bills would be anyway, but would tilt my face having to reach my min hours if i got there are realized how unbeatable it was - i would be absolutely miserable flying down there and then finding myself just folding and listening to audiobooks wondering why i got involved in this - don't want to become one of those miserable prop players clocking in and hating life
If it's a decent game, I think that's a solid deal.

Obviously, you theoretically get the high hand promo drop back. Not sure how much if any they skim. The food/drink will be break evenish depending on quality and appetite. But, one of my fav parts of travel is eating, so I'd probably wouldn't get full value, as I'd want to eat elswhere.

5% rather than 10% softens the blow.

I play in a game like this with a freeroll. I adjust by making bigger raises pre in many spots. Particularly, raising over limpers. I want to take it down now, or play a bigger pot.

I complete the sb much less often, very rarely limp and call fewer raises in the bb.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garick
I think people are talking past each other here. There are two "average loss rates" being discussed.

IRTM and others are talking about the cost to play, which will come off of the top, spread over all players to get an average. Let's call this "cost rate."

Tanqueray and others are talking about how spewy the game is on average, in other words, how much losing players are contributing to winning players on average. Let's call this "donation rate."
Thanks for coining those terms - glad we are able to move forward.

Imagine a casino with high average donation rate, it would be more plausible for someone to claim high win rate. Such discussion of donation rate would probably be more honest than someone’s claim of win rate.
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote
10-29-2019 , 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickroll
1/3 game
No flop no drop
all flops +1 for "free food & drinks"
all flops +1 for high hand bonus IIRC it's every half hour or so
5% rake with $13 max drop (add on the surcharges and it's $15 max)

they are offering free hotel room (if I bring a roommate) + $30 a night for playing during evening hours and food/drinks would all be free if i ate my meals while playing

considering it because I'm winding down self employment and going to start seeking regular employment and this could be a nice paid or break even vacation

theoretical downside - need friends who actually play poker profitably (taken buddies with me to Macau before and it never ended well)

actual downside - rake seems unbeatable, especially so if there are a lot of cbet folds on the flop where a $20 pot gets the $1 rake at 5% taken out then tripled via food/beverage and high hand fees

99% of live play was in Macau back when the games made considering rake a needless exercise - hence my idiocy in these matters

this is in Panama City IIRC, would have to consult the emails again from a few months back - assuming the offer still stands but don't want to initiate contact again if it's a no go

I'm down to travel and all and understand that worst case scenario, a losing session at 1-3 probably cheaper than hotel room and food bills would be anyway, but would tilt my face having to reach my min hours if i got there are realized how unbeatable it was - i would be absolutely miserable flying down there and then finding myself just folding and listening to audiobooks wondering why i got involved in this - don't want to become one of those miserable prop players clocking in and hating life
This is absolutely beatable rake and seems like a great deal. People beat online micros which is basically 5% uncapped. You can beat a 5BB rake cap. 5% saves you a ton of money on the medium-small pots and if pots are hitting the rake cap a lot then it's an extremely soft game anyway.

Is this a personalized offer or something anyone can take advantage of?
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Quote

      
m