Reliable Hourly Numbers

Skors3Skors3 Red Chipper Posts: 667 ✭✭✭
edited February 2017 in General Concepts
Yes, I know there are plenty of ways to measure success but one of them is your hourly rate. I was wondering what people thought about that.

After how many hours of play at a certain level is your hourly rate an accurate indicator of how you are doing?
Tagged:

Comments

  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
    Such a large number of hours, that you'd likely already have moved up to a new level before you hit the "massively significant" # of hours.
  • FilthyCasualFilthyCasual Red Chipper Posts: 871 ✭✭✭
    SplitSuit wrote:
    Such a large number of hours, that you'd likely already have moved up to a new level before you hit the "massively significant" # of hours.
    Succinct and accurate I would believe.

    10k hands from what i've heard, which is 3 months of 6 hours a day, 5 days a week in live games if you average 30 hands an hour (little optimistic for NLHE, IMO).

    But that could still be just a good indication instead of 'statistically significant'. Your cards will tend to lean one way or another during the 10k hands as far as how often you hold up, win flips, hit cards that you can make a play on, etc. so on an so forth, so the 900 hours of live play might still not be a big enough indication, but you'll have a pretty good idea and as SS said, likely would have moved up before it's statistically significant
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
    10k hands is a sneeze (although the issue is that with live poker, given the pace, 10k hands feels like forever). For comparison, I won't go through a student's poker database until they have at least 40k hands, and that's a BARE minimum.

    100k hands for a decent idea on real winrate...and even that has a lot of +/-
  • FilthyCasualFilthyCasual Red Chipper Posts: 871 ✭✭✭
    SplitSuit wrote:
    10k hands is a sneeze (although the issue is that with live poker, given the pace, 10k hands feels like forever). For comparison, I won't go through a student's poker database until they have at least 40k hands, and that's a BARE minimum.

    100k hands for a decent idea on real winrate...and even that has a lot of +/-

    Wit more information being available live, personally don't think that as large of a sample is needed as online to notice trends. If I won 5 bigs an hour over 3 months and hit 10k hands, i'd find it pretty reliable I'm playing at the right level for the time being.

    I'd also be taking my bigger wins and bigger losses into consideration though. Did I have an out of the norm session where I lost or gained several buy ins that can skew the numbers?

    Also, think there is something to be said about how comfortable you are at the table. Do you feel overwhelmed or notice you constantly get your money in bad?

    Sure, not all of this is quantifiable in raw numbers, but you definitely get a better sense of your table presence than multitabling 8 tables. The multitabling will get you raw data, but I think you can digest the information better live.
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,034 -
  • jeffncjeffnc Red Chipper Posts: 4,834 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It seems like we're answering 2 different questions. In practical terms, do I have a pretty good idea I'm a winning player, with a rough idea of how much I might expect to win? Am I at the right level, against the right competition, with the proper bankroll? This sort of question you can take a stab at.

    But that's a far cry from a mathematically accurate answer to your results. Even for this we have to be practical and make some compromises (95% confidence level, etc.)

    Personally, if I played 200 6-hour sessions for a year, I'd consider that roughly a bare minimum for getting a reasonable idea of my hourly rate. Hourly rate - especially for live poker - depends on quite a few things, some of which aren't really taken into account. Look at how much you're up after a year of solid playing, divide by total hours that you're at the "establishment", and see what that looks like.

    Two years would be better of course, but I think one year is usually going to get you close (not always.) Just my personal estimate.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file