Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth101
Chiren80:
$1/$2 NLH: Hands: 861,417 Net: $6,288
$0.01/$0.02 NLH: Hands:626,792 Net: 1,673
He has almost made 1/3 the amount of money at 2nl that he has made at 200nl in the almost the same number of hands. That is fairly interesting. If hits a huge upswing in the next 234,625 hands he could easily make half the amount, or more, he has made at 200nl at 1/100th the stakes in the same number of hands.
I know there are a lot of haters but this is still fascinating to see the difference between skill level between the buy-in levels, empirically, rather than subjectively through play. Although 1/100th in scale he has made almost 1/3 as times the profit. I hope I will be able to see what his profit is when he reaches the same number of hands for both levels.
You are ignoring where the majority of money in small stakes games goes to - the house. The rake is absolutely brutal.
Here is a page listing the effective rakes per 100 hundred hands:
http://www.pokertableratings.com/pok...imit-hold%27em
$2 (as in $.01/$0.02) NL on Stars is raked an average of $2.50 per 1k hands. $200NL is raked an average of $100.20 per 1000 hands.
So in 861,417 hands of $200NL you pay $86,313.98 in rake. That means he earned nearly $87k at the stake, but it all went to the house. At $0.01/$0.02 he paid $1,566.98 in rake. So its more accurate to say that he earned:
$200NL = $86,313.98 + $6,288 = $92,601.98
$2NL = $1,673 + $1566.98 = $3,239.98
The rake is just insanely too high for small stakes games.
