I broke even for 200k hands once..

My longest break even stretch in the last 1.8 million hands (after RB) was around 20k hands.

There's a decent chance that a dowswing like that at micros isn't just bad luck. You might be exploiting your opponent's in the wrong ways or leaking money somewhere else. Try to figure it out.

Yes, but if you've played say 200k hands, that is actually 100k sub-samples of 100k hands (hands 1-100000, hands 2-100001,...., hands 100001-200000), so your calculation, whilst not being completely irrelevant, isn't anywhere near as relevant as you are making it out to be.

Incidentally, I don't think this mean that having 4% of your 100k sub-samples of 100k hands being breakeven or worse over 200k hands is "average" for a player winning at 5bb/100 with a 90 StDev (as those 100k samples aren't independent, only 2 of them are), just that the 4% is only applicable if you have played exactly 100k hands, not more.

The way I see this, if you have played exactly 100k hands and you are break even, then there is (according to your assumptions about winrate and StDev, and assuming static skill levels for both you and player pool) a 4% chance you are winning at 5bb/100. However, if a player has played over 100k hands and has a 100k hand stretch at break even (which is the information you are basing your calculation on), your calculation can't inform of the true winrate of the player.

I'm fairly sure this is correct, but please correct me if I'm wrong here.

You seem to play on sites that are significantly softer than ACR if I'm not mistaken - would be impossible to replicate the kind of winrate you have at 20nl on your site. Even 8bb/100 over a very large sample would be pretty solid at 10 blitz

"My longest break even stretch in the last 1.8 million hands (after RB) was around 20k hands."

Incredibly lucky or complete bullshit.

I've only put 50k into ACR 10nl blitZ and am breakeven lol that entire time! I deposited $250 bucks on there like four years ago so I could play on my phone and I have never had to redeposit because of rakeback... so I guess I made money...???

A legit pro once told me that if you're breakeven in a low stakes high raked game you came out ahead...

past 2y, now that I'm taking the game seriously, no more than 25k
back in the day I remember an 88k slump in 2010
we were all cowboys back then

Card dead can get you.

I need to learn to let go when card dead.

Though my longest losing session is about 10k hands. Or less. Just need to up the volume with the winning rounds.

Big assumption in this question that people are beating the games they play consistently, which isn't true for most unless they never move up. Most people move up to the stake they break even at and stay there trying to beat it. The swings and losing/breakeven stretches at that point are never ending by definition, even when people don't realise it - going up 20BI in 50k hands, followed by down 20BI in the next 50k hands is still a 100k hands breakeven stretch and not 50k.

So my answer would be at least 200k before realising I wasn't good enough to win pre-rakeback, with huge swings in between.

On sites like Sky playing lower than usual to build a roll, the longest downswing is probably 2000 hands. People just give money away there and huge win rates are possible.

Yes. In my last 100k sample I have peaked at 6000bb won but now at around 4500bb won but when you look at the 45000 line my green line has basically hovered there for the last 50k hands or so. Very very frustrating but to quote Omar from The Wire, "It's all in the game yo."

If you told me at hand 0 I'd be up 45bi after 100k I'd snap call but after god moding to +50bi after 45k hands or so, being +45 just hit different rn. Funny how the mind works.