|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 12/1/2008 10:47:07 AM PACIFIC |
 Win rate vs horrible players, iceman5, 11. Oct 2003 16:52 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think most people consider 1-2BB / Hr to be a good win rate. If you are playing truely horrible players, what would you say would a good win rate? Ive been practicing playing 2 and 3 tables at once so Ive been playing the .25/.50 tables to see if I can do 3 things at once. Ive played about 2000 hands and have averaged about 4BB / hr (actually more but the 4 is the number when divided by the number of tables Im playing) So if I play for an hour on 3 tables and win 12BB then I use 4 as my result. Anyway 4BB is pretty good but these players are really bad..like playing J3 offsuit from EP and calling all the way with nothing. Its amazing. My question is..is it possible to average much more than 4-5BB even against bad players or is there a point where statistics say you cant win much more? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Roy Cooke, 11. Oct 2003 19:24 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In straight $5 limit games in my early days in the State of Washington I averaged 4-5 bets/hr. My opponents played with the heart of craps players :-)!.... But I think you can average multiple bets per hour over time when the spread of ability between yourself and your opponents is VERY large. Life is Good :-) Roy Cooke' on 11. Oct 2003 16:52 iceman5 wrote: > I think most people consider 1-2BB / Hr to be a good win rate. If you are > playing truely horrible players, what would you say would a good win rate? Ive > been practicing playing 2 and 3 tables at once so Ive been playing the .25/.50 > tables to see if I can do 3 things at once. Ive played about 2000 hands and > have averaged about 4BB / hr (actually more but the 4 is the number when divided > by the number of tables Im playing) So if I play for an hour on 3 tables and > win 12BB then I use 4 as my result. Anyway 4BB is pretty good but these players > are really bad..like playing J3 offsuit from EP and calling all the way with > nothing. Its amazing. My question is..is it possible to average much more than > 4-5BB even against bad players or is there a point where statistics say you cant > win much more? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Bungus, 12. Oct 2003 14:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I just came to this section of the forums with the express intention of posting the same message. I've been playing .5-1 and 1-2 limit hold em online, and was shocked when I learned 2 BB an hour is a great rate. Exept for two cold days where I broke even, I've been making no less than 20 BB an hour. I don't consider myself an exceptional player, though I am much better than most/all of the other players, so what gives? This is with at least 40 hours of play time. 1-2 BB an hour seems way to low for a good LL HE player | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, 4 POKER, 12. Oct 2003 15:41 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Bungus, "What gives"? You haven't put in enough hours yet, as you are basing it on too short a term. Put in about 1000 more hours and see what your results are. It will give you a clearer (somewhat more accurate) figure. 4P- | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Bungus, 12. Oct 2003 16:25 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I know 40 isn't alot of hours, but I would be willing to wager this hourly win rate that a strong player should be winning more that $3 an hour at the .50-1 tables online | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Blade, 12. Oct 2003 16:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Let me provide my own experience. For over a month I went on an incredible run in which I averaged 10+ BB an hour. I quite simply thought I was the next coming of ADAM THE EXPERT. Then the run stopped I ended up losing 10- 20+BB and hour for the next 2 weeks. My average is about 3 BB an hour. What happened was this I was playing a little to loose which allowed me to go on an incredible run. Somehow you never realize these things when winning. Note I would have been considered tight by many players My erros were slight such as playing small pairs UTG etc. These things allow you to win at amazing rates when going good but as I said before luck it flashy, Math is Roy Jones JR. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Bungus, 12. Oct 2003 21:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I'm not playing too loose. I play maybe 1 hand a round on a 10-8 person table, and I'll play the blinds to the flop if no one raises. And I've already ran into a streak of bad luck, over the past few days. Got some bad beats and cold cards, but kept the few losing sessions to a minimum and the winning ones to a max. Came a little bit under even on the bad days. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, Schuster, 12. Oct 2003 16:42 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| After paying my dues at the .50/1 tables, I'm inclined to agree. The play in general is pretty poor. But, if you were strong enough to make that 6 BB an hour at the .50/1 tables, it's almost a guarantee that you could beat a higher game for money per hour. Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, modestmice, 12. Oct 2003 16:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| lee, your normally so conservative! i dont agree. only by playing in higher limits and testing yourself will you know if you are good enuf to play higher limits. beating weak loose players means nearly nothing in my opinion when considering moving up against tougher players. that dude Daniel Negneuaausueu (nice spellin) from cardplayer had a good article years ago about this subject. he used to beat the hell outta the games in Toronto that were filled with calling stations and loose players and then took his bank to vegas and proceeded to be hammered by much better players. only until he PAID his dues at this level after many thousands of dollars was he able to adapt and beat this competition (meanwhile, he went back and forth to Toronto to refresh his bankroll) . the same applies to any level. dont assume if u beat the hell outta 6-12 in the bay area (like me) that you can then move up and be guaranteed to win becuase of the success at a lower level. theon 12. Oct 2003 16:42 Schuster wrote: > After paying my dues at the .50/1 tables, I'm inclined to agree. The play in general is pretty > poor. But, if you were strong enough to make that 6 BB an hour at the .50/1 tables, it's almost a > guarantee that you could beat a higher game for money per hour. > > Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, 4 POKER, 12. Oct 2003 19:39 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Hi Lee, When a player does well at one particular limit, and has based his results over a long period of time, it can show him how many BB per hour, he/she is making at that limit at hand. Now, what comes into factor when talking about the long term results is the abilities that you have over your opponents, whatever the limit may be. The more edges you have, the better. Now if a player is able to beat a lower limit game, and has based his results (BB per hour), doesn't mean that he'll be able to achieve positive results in a higher limit game. He could, but it's not a guarantee that he would. If that player went to a higher limit game and put in 2000 hours at that limit; he may actually show very poor results. Reason being: if he is not better than his opponents at that level, he will not fair well. Short term, he may. Long term, he will not. That's why it's imperative to always, and only, play against players who are weaker than you are. (Game selection). Does that mean that a player should not move up in limits? Of course not. But he must keep in mind, that when he does move up, that there will be players who are (perhaps) more skilled in poker; and they can have more edges than he has, too. Experience is the way to test your abilities, and to see if you can apply them correctly, and accordingly at that particular limit, and against his opponents at hand. And when you play in games where the difference between your abilities vs. your opponents is a signifigant difference......then you'll stand to show good results. And included in those edges, is discipline, bankroll, money management (which is a big part of being disciplined), and game selection. In fact.....they come before anything else in my honest opinion. 4P- on 12. Oct 2003 16:42 Schuster wrote: > After paying my dues at the .50/1 tables, I'm inclined to agree. The play in general is pretty > poor. But, if you were strong enough to make that 6 BB an hour at the .50/1 tables, it's almost a > guarantee that you could beat a higher game for money per hour. > > Lee | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: Win rate vs horrible players, ICIP, 13. Oct 2003 12:10 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| I think that one thing that people are forgetting in this thread is that it is possible online to have an ongoing average of 6BB+ per hour. For two reasons, one as already pointed out the wide gap in skills levels for some of these low limit (and mid limit) online players. Two being that many more hands are played per hour online then in live play. You can expect a rough average of 30 hands per hour playing live. In a slow online game, you generally don't drop much below 60 hands per hours. Normal is in the range of 80 to 100 and I have seen over 130 hands per hour in a short handed game. So if you see three times the number of hands, you can multiply the win average by 3 for an hourly basis. Then if you play a couple of tables at the same time you will probably lower your hourly BB per table, but increase your overall number of BB per hour. So comparing live play to online play is an unfair comparison. Live play still has a big draw, but if you really want to increase the amount of money you want to win per hour, online is place to be. ICIP | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network |
|