yea me too tbh. i think its hard to get out of the habit of auto-piloting maybe

i think using ptbb is outdated and a dumb way in general to discuss winrates. It always seems to cause so much confusion amongst newbs as to what mean what (see above). I think 2p2 in general needs to move towards just saying things in terms of BB/100 or bb/100 ( BB=2*bb obv). most people use holdemmanager now anyways and we don't refer to our winrates as HMbb's or anything like that.


Anyways thats just something dumb i had to get off my chest cuz i'm tired of seeing the same misunderstanding in every 'winrate thread' (tbh i don't even kno why i open theses winrate threads in the first place)

4.3ptbb is an extremely high win rate, like top top tier regs. i said top top

Can either of you post a higher winrate at 2/4+ over 250k hands? 100k hands? This would be impressive at 2/4 and legendary at 5/10 imo.

250k hands is nothing dude
im like a 3ptbb winner but ran at 6ptbb for over 250k hands

people underestimate variance soooooooooo much
4.3ptbb is a super sick winrate

If
then how do you know:

?

At least you got this right.

I think the only people who have a chance for 4+ winrate (8bigblinds/100) are the ones who play not that many tables and bumhunt hard. People who do it will never have significant sample though so we will never know.
Look at the most famous regs. Leatherass, Nano etc. Nano is 2ptbb/100 according to PR. He have some leaks from what Ive seen (his results from UTG and UTG+1 being one example) but to claim you can "easily" become better than Nano is ridiculous. Winning 4.3 is probably just running hot unless you are one of the very few disciplined people who despite improving and winning didn't move up.

oh how i lolled. it depends, im running at 3.6ptbb at Nl1000 over 30Khands and -1.1ptbb at 1-2 over abt the same amnt and like 2.7pt at 2-4 over 55K hands. the other day i put in a sesh at 1-2 for the 1st time in aaaaaagges and i really noticed the difference between it an 2-4 its harder to get a high winrate at 1-2 cos the plrs are so nitty but its much easier to just win cos the plrs are such worse hand-readers an just less imaginative than 2-4+

Btw, did anybody played 200NL enough to know how easy those games are ? I remember a post from BBV when one guy posted million hands from 200NL winning like 3ptbb or something.

EDIT : found it :
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/54...irrion-501400/

150k in million hands is about 3.75ptbb/100. The guy said he plays ton of tables and tilt/spew a lot. So maybe 4ptbb/100 is not unsustainable...

I obv played way more than 250k hands?

That was obvious, but what should also be obvious is that there are external factors aside from variance that will affect your winrate over samples larger than 250k hands, so that you still cannot say you have a particular winrate with any certainty.

which is obv

after like 1 million hands or whatever the winrate is actually pretty accurate but after 250k hands it is not

Btw did somebody do some bayesian analysis for winrates ? Like you start with some assumptions and upgrade your beliefs based on hands you played ? I saw some results and those converge a lot faster and give more certainity after shorter samples than classical analysis. The results I saw are for normal distribution of winrates which unfortunately isn't real. One could take more realistic wr distribution from regulars stats at PTR and go from here. I have a feeling that those would give us much more understanding than classical analysis with confidence intervals.

You've got nano's winrate wrong. His winrate is 4ptbb/100. He's a primary example that you can have that sort of winrate because he has it over 1.3 million hands. And he plays 18 tables.

I play only 4 tables and do a fair amount of bumhunting, so I dont think 4ptbb/100 is that hard for me to reach.

why is winrate taken so seriously? if you play x hands and fix a leak or change something, your winrate from the last x hands is irrelevant because it cant define your current style anymore. this is not even considering the sick amount of hands you have to play with a static strategy/mindset/situation/etc to get a true winrate.

this is beyond ridiculous. very few players hold 4+ over the long haul.

i know many players who have gotten higher and higher winrates as they move up. ive been kinda that way myself. the higher i play, the more i want to learn and get better, and work hard on my game.

I think your off a little on your stats, Nano is is a lot higher than that. I play 8-10 tables 100k hands a month at 4.47 PTbb/100. I don't consider myself a bumhunter but I do try and practice good game selection. I also do not consider myself on par with nano. The fact that he plays 18+ tables at 4pt's blows my mind. As far as moving up I don't think it is as simple as making more money, there are a few other factors to consider one of which is variance and how it affects your quality of life. As far as the missing million plus hands from graph since switching from LHE to NL a year.5 ago this is all I have since I started using HEM so take it fwiw.

link to graph http://img188.imageshack.us/i/400khands.jpg/

You guys are right, Nano is 4ptbb/100. Thanks for correcting me
Hmm, I will refrain from commenting about it until I play 1 million hands at Stars 2/4 myself :-)

Winrate discussion is pointless. Hourly rate ftw.

If you don't want to out your sn you need to graph BB vs hands to prove it. If all still holds true then I'd be impressed but I don't think people like you are as common as some people ITT think.

Here is bb graph and I agree. I don't think it is common at all but a lot of that is a function of what route you wanna take in terms of poker and being satisfied with that decision. In my case I am content to take a very low risk approach to the game and at least for the time being I am happy with that choice.

http://img19.imageshack.us/i/400kbb.jpg/

lololol this

Nicely done. My last question is were these all 6max and/or FR? Higher winrates are possible at HU. Also it'd be tougher if most of your hands are at MSNL instead of SSNL.

also, arent HEM winrates double that of PT winrates?