Big Bets per hour live?

ArtArtBobartArtArtBobart Red Chipper Posts: 356 ✭✭
edited January 2017 in General Concepts
I think I've heard as a rule of thumb that over a statistically significant sample one should expect to earn between 5-10 big bets per hour at small stakes NL live games. I mainly play $1/3 which would mean I should expect to be able to earn upwards of $30 an hour on the average.

Reading between the lines of some things I've heard Ed say I'm wondering where I should set my expectations. For example I think I heard him refer to $2/5 and make a comment to the effect "If you're not making $70 an hour you are leaving money on the table." That would be 14 big blinds per hour.

I've heard Doug say something more in line with what I had heard. He has stated that $40 - $45 an hour would be an outstanding rate at $2/5 (i.e., 8-9 BBs).

I've seen swings in my win rate as certain people enter and leave the player pool. I believe in the past I did have extended streaks between $20-$30 an hour, but recently I have been seeing results more in the mid teens.

Just want to see where I should set my benchmark. :)
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,069 -
    I have a video about this very topic coming out next week...but I think 10bb/hr is the top-side of the spectrum in today's live games (barring very soft games or extra stack depth)
    📑 Grab my custom poker spreadsheet pack right now.
    📘 Start the Preflop & Math Poker Workbook today.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Looking forward to the video, James. I think there are a lot of naive ideas about win rate or if you should even look at an hourly as your best benchmark. 10 bbs per hour is certainly crushing the games in my experience; I make a living at a rate that averages 8 bbs per hour, but it's not really how I organize my finances or my thinking, as the games change, the profitability shifts drastically from month to month, and I think one should be more goal oriented and trying to make big hits when the games are good.
  • EazzyEazzy Red Chipper Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭✭
    I personally think worrying about your hourly rate is a mistake. Your bottom line is much more important. And of course how well your playing

    Ive seen supper nits who can 3 bb an hour..but can play 2-5 for 15 hours and thats over $200 a day...

    compare it to an aggressive solid lag who plays the player well concentrates on the game and only can play 5 hours a day *(hits his stop loose and has to leave...tires out much faster)....but makes 10 bb an hour...but can only comfortably play 1-2 (because of big swings)....he only makes $100 a day...

    I'm not saying you should become nit...but to try to push your hourly rate up by high variance low (marginal) plays is going to hurt your poker game in the long run...

    When I realized this about 18month ago...and began to play more small ball poker...depending more on my hand reading skills...and less on pushing marginal spots...my bottom line went though the roof...

    I can play much longer sessions now (rarely hit my stop loose or get exhausted from high variance to my money)

    I don't need to take time off to deal with my loosing streak..there just not that big..

    I play better for longer...not thinking about that last big hand...

    Concentrate much harder on how others play and hand reading...playing with a marked deck is the best return with the lowest variance you can get...I try to come up with lines that give me the most information..even if it might be slightly less ev...

    I can play higher..with much lower draw downs...so risk of ruin gets cut way down.

    Longer hours more trips meant more benefits from the casino...I love free food in the diamond club and upgrades to suits when I stay....which in turn meant lower expenses and more fun trips...and a better return on my bottom line

    And surprisingly by concentrating on my bottom line my hourly win rate went up as well even though I now include expenses in it...
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    Currently right now I'm running 8 bb / hour @ 2/5

    I would agree with James 10 bb per hour is a very good goal.

    I guess I need more coaching from James :D
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    Eazzy wrote:
    I personally think worrying about your hourly rate is a mistake. Your bottom line is much more important. And of course how well your playing

    Ive seen supper nits who can 3 bb an hour..but can play 2-5 for 15 hours and thats over $200 a day...

    compare it to an aggressive solid lag who plays the player well concentrates on the game and only can play 5 hours a day *(hits his stop loose and has to leave...tires out much faster)....but makes 10 bb an hour...but can only comfortably play 1-2 (because of big swings)....he only makes $100 a day...

    I'm not saying you should become nit...but to try to push your hourly rate up by high variance low (marginal) plays is going to hurt your poker game in the long run...

    When I realized this about 18month ago...and began to play more small ball poker...depending more on my hand reading skills...and less on pushing marginal spots...my bottom line went though the roof...

    I can play much longer sessions now (rarely hit my stop loose or get exhausted from high variance to my money)

    I don't need to take time off to deal with my loosing streak..there just not that big..

    I play better for longer...not thinking about that last big hand...

    Concentrate much harder on how others play and hand reading...playing with a marked deck is the best return with the lowest variance you can get...I try to come up with lines that give me the most information..even if it might be slightly less ev...

    I can play higher..with much lower draw downs...so risk of ruin gets cut way down.

    Longer hours more trips meant more benefits from the casino...I love free food in the diamond club and upgrades to suits when I stay....which in turn meant lower expenses and more fun trips...and a better return on my bottom line

    And surprisingly by concentrating on my bottom line my hourly win rate went up as well even though I now include expenses in it...


    Hey man congrats on your success.

    I would disagree with you on a few things though.

    1. Why do you think you can't keep focus for long hours LAG vs Small Ball?

    We are both basically hand reading all the time and 3 or 4 more hands an hour won't make that big a difference.

    2. I do agree with you about the variance obviously but that's not a factor as long as your rolled properly. I won't ever leave if I'm playing well and the energy at the table is good 3 or 4 buy ins is no big deal.

    The only time I will leave is if the table sucks or I suck and that won't change playing small ball.

    3. I think that developing a basic strategy like small ball is a good way to make a grind but the problem with it is that you won't improve to much because your not really pushing yourself.

    Anyways I just thought I would share my thoughts with you and I appreciate your long post on the subject and thought it deserved a response.
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,069 -
    ChipTrader wrote:
    I guess I need more coaching from James :D

    I make no promises that students will make 10bb/hr =)
    📑 Grab my custom poker spreadsheet pack right now.
    📘 Start the Preflop & Math Poker Workbook today.
  • Ed MillerEd Miller RCP Coach Posts: 330
    I don't recall saying that if you aren't making $70/hr at $2-$5 that you're leaving money on the table.

    I do think that is an achievable winrate for the BEST players at the level. But I really mean the BEST.

    When I quote winrates to these questions, I go with what I think is achievable for a significant percentage of the people who are reading. Right now, the numbers I tend to quote are:

    $10/hr for $1-$2
    $25/hr for $2-$5
    $40/hr for $5-$10

    If you exceed these winrates for an extended period of time--congrats! You're doing poker very well.

    Of course, some people will do better. But there's so much winrate inflation out there, someone winning $20/hr at $2-$5 may feel like a failure, when in fact they should feel like a winning player who has accomplished something most people who play poker cannot do.
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    I agree with Ed's numbers overall but I also agree with James 10 bb is achievable and a very good goal. I watch very closely what the regs make and keep mental notes all the time of who's been running well and who's not. In the last 5 years there are really only 3 guys other then me that are still grinding away day after day and the rest come and go randomly meaning that they have J O B's outside poker but I would say are still profitable and that field is really only anther 10 regs. So thats a total of 10 to 15 guys in a Casino that has 15 tables of 2/5 on its busiest night. I would estimate that there are 1000 to 1500 players that play in that room on any given month so 15 out of a 1000 is a huge accomplishment. I'm not meaning to sound arrogant or bragful but really thers only 1 other guy that has sustained the same win rate as me over the same 5 years. I am grateful to Ed though all his books have made a huge difference and I've read them all many times over and over and really done a lot of hard work implementing the concepts so unless your willing to really dig down and work your ass off everday plus lots of study at home away from the tables be thrilled with $20 an hour.


    It's so funny because this weekend I watched the documentary Bet. Fold, Raise the online story and seeing the difference in speed of success rates online vs live was just crazy and the numbers that they were making compared to the numbers I make over the same time period was making me a little sick :(
  • Ed MillerEd Miller RCP Coach Posts: 330
    The guys who succeeded online did great. A ton of people got buried, though. Serious online poker isn't for normal people, IMO.
  • stranstran Red Chipper Posts: 9 ✭✭
    if we stipulate ed's win rates are really in the ballpark would it be reasonable to make the following adjustments ?

    if you are playing m-f daytime subtract 20 % ( tighter more experienced players not stacking off as easily ) but weekend evenings add 20% ( way more fish ) ?

    if you're playing a short stack, cut the win rate in half ?

    I'm a recreational player but I think I have a decent feel for when I've played well ( or poorly ) against $1/$2,$1/$3 and $2/$5 tables I'd like to see if there may be some win rate that over time would be an indicate if I am good relative to the competition. I know llsnl players are clueless compared to successful mid-stakes pros and I know i'll probably never play enough hours to have a statistically valid sample but I'd appreciate knowing any reasonable benchmark numbers.

    I'm a new member to this site but this has been the best $10/mo. I've ever spent on poker
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    stran wrote:
    I'd like to see if there may be some win rate that over time would be an indicate if I am good relative to the competition.

    95% of the player pool is losing over the long term. The rake ensures that. If you are making money over whatever you consider "long term" you are good relative to the competition.
    stran wrote:

    I'm a new member to this site but this has been the best $10/mo. I've ever spent on poker

    Thank you, flattery will get you everywhere! :)
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • SplitSuitSplitSuit RCP Coach Posts: 4,069 -
    This is the video I mentioned earlier:

    [video]
    📑 Grab my custom poker spreadsheet pack right now.
    📘 Start the Preflop & Math Poker Workbook today.
  • JinplydbstJinplydbst Red Chipper Posts: 53
    Hello,
    Recent 8 days of my record from 1-2 live is,,

    Day___bb/hr____time played(hr)
    1____31.20____4
    2____-57____3.5
    3____80____5
    4____25____5
    5____-50____3.5
    6____27.75____4.5
    7____-60____3
    8____-55____4

    that is for 2 weeks, and I am not making money in overall, and swings are too big.
    How do you hold for 10bb/hr in 1-2?
    is it like repeating up and downs during the game or try to build stack little by little whenever possible, which has to be nitty nitty.

    I count my hands to play like 1-2 hands/orbit, so try to be VPIP: 18-21/15-18, and when I get dead cards in two orbit, try to wait and see if I can find a spot I can raise with any two cards pre flop..

    So, I should make a goal to make 10bb/hr and satisfy with it because it is 1-2 live... to see long term profit..hmm guess that is painful, but my level and money I have, can't expect more than that can I...

    Thank you for good questions and comments guys..
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    [video]
    TLDW: 32 hours means nothing. Win one $160 all-in and you are at a 'good' win rate.
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper Posts: 4,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Everyone is going to agree with Doug, Jinply; just play your game and worry about the bbs/hr much later. It takes at least hundreds of hours to even begin to understand where you are at in relation to your stake and live player pool; I've never even seen a statistically based number, one that is not a well-based estimate, for the hours you would need to feel confident about "your" win rate. However, this only makes sense: win rates are overrated even when you do have an established one; all player pools and poker scenarios are different; and a win rate is all about past performance, not a guarantee of future results. There are no paychecks for grinders.
  • JinplydbstJinplydbst Red Chipper Posts: 53
    Thank you guys, and extra thank to SplitSuit :)
    I shouldn't be considering win rates here, right now...
    Just focus on the game I play and more focus on making correct decisions...which is sooooo hard..
  • Jumbo DentonJumbo Denton Red Chipper Posts: 22
    My bb rate is 27 per hr. Really depends on the opponents. I am a tag and don't drink. Also study this stuff all the time. They think they can get better by playing a lot of hands. Everyday I get better. The other day a player had a stack 50000 and mine was 37000. He opened for 3700 and he snapped my push w my kk. He never considered that his ak was a real dog. This all depends on the opponent.
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    My bb rate is 27 per hr. Really depends on the opponents. I am a tag and don't drink. Also study this stuff all the time. They think they can get better by playing a lot of hands. Everyday I get better. The other day a player had a stack 50000 and mine was 37000. He opened for 3700 and he snapped my push w my kk. He never considered that his ak was a real dog. This all depends on the opponent.

    With all due respect I don't believe you lol

    I have run at 27bb but never for longer then 20 hour periods and I have over 1000 hours per year on average.

    I think giving people this kind of expectation is silly.

    If you are running at that rate please tell me where your playing and I will pay you a nice split :)
  • Jumbo DentonJumbo Denton Red Chipper Posts: 22
    I play live games only. Like I said, it depends on the opponents. I play 1-2 and at a win rate of 27 it is only $54 per hour. There are various motivations for playing. Some just bring in a few hundred and have a few beers, others don't buy in for enough so they have no expectation of really winning. Players will call you down just for the rush of winning. They are buying the expectation of winning which may be remote. At a 9 top, you have 3 winners and 6 leave with no money. Not real complicated.
  • EricEric Red Chipper Posts: 46 ✭✭
    Of course, some people will do better. But there's so much winrate inflation out there, someone winning $20/hr at $2-$5 may feel like a failure, when in fact they should feel like a winning player who has accomplished something most people who play poker cannot do.

    I think Miller provided some great perspective here. I hope people don't pass over it too quickly.

    Not to mention the taxman or the lack there of that blood-sucking POS.

    Eric
  • JCWJCW Red Chipper Posts: 93 ✭✭
    I think I've heard as a rule of thumb that over a statistically significant sample one should expect to earn between 5-10 big bets per hour at small stakes NL live games. I mainly play $1/3 which would mean I should expect to be able to earn upwards of $30 an hour on the average.

    Reading between the lines of some things I've heard Ed say I'm wondering where I should set my expectations. For example I think I heard him refer to $2/5 and make a comment to the effect "If you're not making $70 an hour you are leaving money on the table." That would be 14 big blinds per hour.

    I've heard Doug say something more in line with what I had heard. He has stated that $40 - $45 an hour would be an outstanding rate at $2/5 (i.e., 8-9 BBs).

    I've seen swings in my win rate as certain people enter and leave the player pool. I believe in the past I did have extended streaks between $20-$30 an hour, but recently I have been seeing results more in the mid teens.

    Just want to see where I should set my benchmark. :)

    Hey ArtArtBobart,

    So I am going to come at this at a totally different angle here. As I have spent a lot of time talking about Winrates with others. Not so much about hourly but about the concept of Winrates.

    The way I read your question, there is a lot of entitlement within it. This is common and I am NOT singling you out. I used to think this way too. That as a good player you should be winning x/bb an hour over a period of time. And while that is a useful benchmark, I think there are some pitfalls in that line of thought.

    We all live in the real world. And it is helpful to know how much we can make or should be making compared to our peers. It is useful in decisions of where to live and can I afford that new car. So we need to give thought to Winrates. I get and appreciate that need.

    But Winrates are just assumption made on data collected on our past decisions + variance. As a Live player we can never play enough hands for our data to be accurate. Even online it is difficult to play enough hands, although we can get a more sound picture online. So we have to use what he have to see how we did. But it doesn't entitle us to anything.

    You can be the best player in the world, but if you are playing in bad games with bad rakes in bad seats it will not do you very well. Or you can be a spew monkey in a great game and good reads and be making a fortune. Poker Skill level helps but it is not the end-all of poker.

    I bring this all up because I have seen people become complacent and have a sense of entitlement when it comes to Winrates. I know I have at times. Some pros talk about how, if they play 10 hours in their game then they know they won X amount regardless of the results. But that isn't true.

    The truth is that you have to hustle. You need to find good games. You need to find the right seats (positions) in those games. You need to find ways to exploit your opponents. And you need to not tilt and play your A-game.

    Then you need to do it again tomorrow.

    If you are not doing those things then you are not making the most regardless if your Winrate is good or bad right now.

    All your Winrates tell you is how much you have won in the last X/hours. But you are not entitled to win that over the next X/hours.
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    JCW wrote:
    I think I've heard as a rule of thumb that over a statistically significant sample one should expect to earn between 5-10 big bets per hour at small stakes NL live games. I mainly play $1/3 which would mean I should expect to be able to earn upwards of $30 an hour on the average.

    Reading between the lines of some things I've heard Ed say I'm wondering where I should set my expectations. For example I think I heard him refer to $2/5 and make a comment to the effect "If you're not making $70 an hour you are leaving money on the table." That would be 14 big blinds per hour.

    I've heard Doug say something more in line with what I had heard. He has stated that $40 - $45 an hour would be an outstanding rate at $2/5 (i.e., 8-9 BBs).

    I've seen swings in my win rate as certain people enter and leave the player pool. I believe in the past I did have extended streaks between $20-$30 an hour, but recently I have been seeing results more in the mid teens.

    Just want to see where I should set my benchmark. :)

    Hey ArtArtBobart,

    So I am going to come at this at a totally different angle here. As I have spent a lot of time talking about Winrates with others. Not so much about hourly but about the concept of Winrates.

    The way I read your question, there is a lot of entitlement within it. This is common and I am NOT singling you out. I used to think this way too. That as a good player you should be winning x/bb an hour over a period of time. And while that is a useful benchmark, I think there are some pitfalls in that line of thought.

    We all live in the real world. And it is helpful to know how much we can make or should be making compared to our peers. It is useful in decisions of where to live and can I afford that new car. So we need to give thought to Winrates. I get and appreciate that need.

    But Winrates are just assumption made on data collected on our past decisions + variance. As a Live player we can never play enough hands for our data to be accurate. Even online it is difficult to play enough hands, although we can get a more sound picture online. So we have to use what he have to see how we did. But it doesn't entitle us to anything.

    You can be the best player in the world, but if you are playing in bad games with bad rakes in bad seats it will not do you very well. Or you can be a spew monkey in a great game and good reads and be making a fortune. Poker Skill level helps but it is not the end-all of poker.

    I bring this all up because I have seen people become complacent and have a sense of entitlement when it comes to Winrates. I know I have at times. Some pros talk about how, if they play 10 hours in their game then they know they won X amount regardless of the results. But that isn't true.

    The truth is that you have to hustle. You need to find good games. You need to find the right seats (positions) in those games. You need to find ways to exploit your opponents. And you need to not tilt and play your A-game.

    Then you need to do it again tomorrow.

    If you are not doing those things then you are not making the most regardless if your Winrate is good or bad right now.

    All your Winrates tell you is how much you have won in the last X/hours. But you are not entitled to win that over the next X/hours.


    Dude bad bad bad bad actually HORRIBLE !!!

    Completely wrong attitude. I know players that rarely have losing days (I'm not one of them) I know other players that rarely have losing weeks (I'm not one of those either) I know others that never have losing months (I am one of them).

    This whole large sample size ideology is a load of crap. When Sklansky came out with the theory of poker he left out one important concept and that was we are not robots we are human beings. If we were robots then he and you would be right BUT we are human beings and we can ADAPT and change to the other mathematical factors that Sklansky missed.

    Yes there are 52 cards, yes there are between 2 to 10 seats, yes there are a finite number of combinations, yes there are ranges based on varying factors of players all very measurable mathematically BUT what is not measurable mathematically well it actually is but the equations would be ridiculous is the person making the decisions behind those cards.

    This is where Sklansky and all you really smart young guys miss the boat but enough said because it takes years and years of playing live as well as years of age and wisdom before you will get this understanding.

    In the meantime stop thinking like a robot ... your a human being ;)
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    ChipTrader wrote:

    This whole large sample size ideology is a load of crap.

    There is huge variance in poker. It is built into the math of the game. There are people that have gone for months of winning sessions, even years. Here is 1800 hours of winning results:

    0tRXUe3.png

    If we simulate the next 1800 hours by randomly choosing one of the observed sessions and using it again in the simulated session and do that for 700 hours for 1000 different simulated futures:

    Yio9flN.png

    We could see that winning player run like God for years, he could "never post a losing session for years" If this simulation represents just a pool of winning players there there is guaranteed to be some guys that do run as good as you see. These outliers must exist, and they will draw attention.

    Large numbers are not a load of crap, they are the underlying truth of the game.
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    Doug Hull wrote:
    ChipTrader wrote:

    This whole large sample size ideology is a load of crap.

    There is huge variance in poker. It is built into the math of the game. There are people that have gone for months of winning sessions, even years. Here is 1800 hours of winning results:

    0tRXUe3.png

    If we simulate the next 1800 hours by randomly choosing one of the observed sessions and using it again in the simulated session and do that for 700 hours for 1000 different simulated futures:

    Yio9flN.png

    We could see that winning player run like God for years, he could "never post a losing session for years" If this simulation represents just a pool of winning players there there is guaranteed to be some guys that do run as good as you see. These outliers must exist, and they will draw attention.

    Large numbers are not a load of crap, they are the underlying truth of the game.

    Doug

    Were's the math that calculates how I feel today and I'm going to play my C game versus my A game?

    Were's the math that says today I folded a set of 55's successfully over a higher set because I saw his eye twitch ?

    Were's the math that says call a min raise shove flush draw board because he just took 2 bad beats and is steaming ?

    Were's the math that calculates the fish buying Ed's books and improving his game in a few weeks?

    etc... etc...

    Your model is only valid in a statistical bubble of fixed equations but poker and players are always changing but its ok you can just keep believing the game can not be consistent for a players lifetime (assuming he adapts to the changes).

    I'm happy you believe that a downswing is merely variance and you need 100k hands before you fix it lol


    O one more thing please answer the question seriously I would like to share with you something.

    Is a coin flip always 50/50 ?
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    You have correctly pointed to the many places in poker that are people based, not math based. That is part of the game. Great players are good at both.
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    Doug Hull wrote:
    You have correctly pointed to the many places in poker that are people based, not math based. That is part of the game. Great players are good at both.

    Doug,

    My point is that Math is misleading in games of chance when applied in the live context.

    To make my point about a coin flip being a 50% probability.

    IF you knew ALL the variables of the coin flip. Speed, Surface Tension, slight imperfections in the coin, gravity, surface area resistance of were the coin hits, angle of contact etc etc ... it is highly probably to predict the coin 100% of the time IF you knew all the variables !

    Sklansky leads people to assume they can not and that Math is the better tool and in Online poker he would be correct a much higher period of time but in live poker he misses the boat completely.

    There go forth and be free LOL
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    ChipTrader wrote:

    IF you knew ALL the variables of the coin flip. Speed, Surface Tension, slight imperfections in the coin, gravity, surface area resistance of were the coin hits, angle of contact etc etc ... it is highly probably to predict the coin 100% of the time IF you knew all the variables !

    Moving discusion to talk sections of:

    Wiki: Chaos Theory

    Wiki: Predeterminism
    :)
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • JCWJCW Red Chipper Posts: 93 ✭✭
    ChipTrader wrote:


    Dude bad bad bad bad actually HORRIBLE !!!

    Completely wrong attitude. I know players that rarely have losing days (I'm not one of them) I know other players that rarely have losing weeks (I'm not one of those either) I know others that never have losing months (I am one of them).

    This whole large sample size ideology is a load of crap. When Sklansky came out with the theory of poker he left out one important concept and that was we are not robots we are human beings. If we were robots then he and you would be right BUT we are human beings and we can ADAPT and change to the other mathematical factors that Sklansky missed.

    Yes there are 52 cards, yes there are between 2 to 10 seats, yes there are a finite number of combinations, yes there are ranges based on varying factors of players all very measurable mathematically BUT what is not measurable mathematically well it actually is but the equations would be ridiculous is the person making the decisions behind those cards.

    This is where Sklansky and all you really smart young guys miss the boat but enough said because it takes years and years of playing live as well as years of age and wisdom before you will get this understanding.

    In the meantime stop thinking like a robot ... your a human being ;)

    OK. How to address this.

    First off, not sure why calling me a robot is kind of insulting. Or implying that I am "thinking like a robot" is also the same. I honestly don't know what you are talking about?

    I've read your post a dozen times tying to figure it out. But I don't think you read mine even once. You might have glanced over it, saw the words Sample Size and then replied.

    So you don't believe that sample size has any meaning. Yesterday I played for 2 hours and won $180. So my Winrate is $90 a hour. Am I entitled to win $90 an hour now? Should I bank on that? Should I expect that every time.

    Once I came into the casino and won $1800 in the first orbit. Why don't I do that every time now? What is going on? Or I came into the casino and lost $500 the first hand. What is that in Hourly?????

    It seems to me that sample size of greater than 1 is important to SOME degree. So sure we can disagree on how big of a sample size a person needs. I would think that we could agree that a large sample size is more useful than a small one.

    It is all a collection of data that we can use to speculate results but we are not entitled to those results. That is what I was saying before and now.

    But the point of my original post was the flawed concept of Winrate. And that there are so many factors into one's Winrate that are often overlooked that is really isn't a very useful tool.

    Winrate is an "evil" that we need to try to figure out how much money we will have at the end of the month but shouldn't be taken for granted. For professionals to make the best bankroll decisions they can make using the data they have on their play.

    It is much better to go out there and just make good decisions and not focus on Winrate.

    And that is Robot thinking?
  • ChipTraderChipTrader Red Chipper Posts: 178
    JCW wrote:

    It is much better to go out there and just make good decisions and not focus on Winrate.

    And that is Robot thinking?



    Ok first of let me apologize I wasn't trying to insult you on the contrary I was trying suggest you think a little differently. I was however insulting the theory of large numbers and mathematically probabilities when it comes to Live Poker. It's my experience that the math should be the last thing you focus on and perfect in the live game (with the exception of live tournaments) I think math is more important in tournaments because of stack sizes.

    Now to address why I think your logic is bad and again its just my opinion. If you only focus on making good mathematical decisions as taught by the online community you will miss the boat completely in terms of live play. Because there is SO much more INFORMATION available to a live player if they know what to look for and how to use it the live player does not have to be focused on making the best mathematical decision because the math is screwed up based on the additional information. If you pay attention to the other factors and information sources in live play and you become good at understanding them then you theoretically will change the probabilities substantially and a 50/50 coin flip now becomes almost 100% predictable because you can use the additional information. Now that being said it will is highly unlikely to be 100% because its is extremely difficult to predict the mind of another player with 100% accuracy (hell I don't even know what I'm going to do some days lol) but you can substantially increase your odds.

    I know Sklanky likes the quote

    “Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose.”

    This is the math side of the game but it is incomplete. What should be added is "and you know HOW your opponent will react to your actions".

    This is the Live side of the game.

    If your focus isn't on making money at the end of the day then your a fool (not you specifically) because your thinking like a robot. Yes making the best decision is the most important thing but you need a complete mathematical equation to do that and live poker can never be complete mathematically as pointed out above.


    To give you an example in action that the online world and the math guys would laugh at me about but has served me very well and I estimate made me 10's of thousands of dollars over the years:

    If I am losing badly on any given day and I am playing very well, I simply leave the Casino. Why because I understand that in this case the math is not significant for whatever reason beyond the sight of my measurement (I am not seeing 100% of the factors). I simply am not winning ... so why continue with an incomplete equation?.

    Anyways Focus on making money is my advise and if your not then ask yourself WHY and what can I do to change myself so I can adapt to the game I am playing.

    This is about MONEY .. its not about being SMART.
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,867 -
    Let's all play nice.

    I lost the point of this whole thread. I am going to go talk about how to play specific hands of poker now. :)
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks

Leave a Comment

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