Our PS winrates

[Beastmaster]

Are the days of 4 tabling for 1bb/100 gone? I play on FT/UB/ABS and was at 1bb/100 at 60k hands this year at 2/4-3/6 , now I have 80k hands and a little above breakeven.

Profit at the small stakes comes mostly from RB/bonus and those are getting worse...at least from ABS and UB.

Maybe time to start playing fewer tables at a higher limit and table / seat select well....but when I look at WR for 5/10 at Stars I can't imagine playing 2 tables and being happy with .5bb-1bb/100?

[timoK]

well if you 2 table you do 200 hands per hour = about 4.8 BB rake per hour if you are platin I gues you get like 23% RB (rough estimation)

so your true winrate is 1.21 + 4.8*0.23 = 2.3 BB/hour = about 14$ per hour

but if you 6 to 8 table and dont win anything in the long run you get supernova easy (and some steps to elite).
= 27% RB and about 600 hands per hour
true winrate = 600*2.4/100*0.27 = 3.9 BB/hour = 23.5$

[milesdyson]

[ QUOTE ]
I see two people in this threat:

one is running at -1BB/100 at 3-6 for like 40k hands
one is running at -0.2 BB/100 at 5-10 for like 30k hands
sadly one of both is me [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

one of the most feared people out of the stars regular threat is running at -0.7BB/100 at 5-10 for 150k hands

And I always promote my opinion the nobody can beat multitabling stars (only way to play several 10k hands within a reasonable timeframe) low limit (up to 5-10) since the partypoker close from more than 1BB.

but prove me wrong and I will buy you a beer at WSOP in june in vegas

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's an old 5/10 screenshot of mine. Pretty sure I was averaging between 3 and 4 tables at a time.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
Are the days of 4 tabling for 1bb/100 gone?


[/ QUOTE ]I really don't think so. The key is maintaining awareness for when a good table goes bad - since the good players are looking for the same chooks you are, you could look up and see that the table is all of a sudden averaging 27/20 = no fun.

[danzasmack]

meh while losing at a small rate over a large sample could be variance i think it's imporant to consider the fact that you are making small mistakes that have added up over a long sample.

TBH I've found these threads shocking. Not that I crush or anything like that but it was like one day EVERYBODY just decided to post that they weren't winning. I thought everybody was like 1bb winners trying to get to 2/2.5.

For a 4 week stretch through january and some of february i was a big winner at HU and a marginal loser (like -.8bb/100) at 6max. Not everything is variance. I sucked at 6max, plain and simple. Not that I still don't suck but I got a lot better when I decided I did suck. I think I'm playing really well now but we'll see what I have to say about that in another 3 months.

Sometimes stuff that seems OK, like 3-betting light on the button because you do that sometimes, or c/c'ing down A hi, is sometimes just totally wrong. Now I get in pots with players who make like standard/good plays but I know that the play in particular vs. me is like REALLY good or REALLY bad. From his end, he just got unlucky or the hand was w/e but if you think about it, it wasn't and is just like spewage.

I'm not trying to come off as like arrogant here I'm not a big winner in the stars 5/10 game or anything like that just sharing some stuff that I've been working on lately that has really helped my game.

[timoK]

[ QUOTE ]



[/ QUOTE ]

I am in vegas from june 18th to end of the month (I'm staying in some kind of rental villa with other guys)
where can I meet you to delivery you beer (or do you cheat and the screen is from before party closure?)

I can also bring you a nice german beer other when I come with my "lederhose" to the WSOP

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
what is long?

people say: play 10k hands than post you stats her for review

others say: play 100k to eliminate swings...

I will post some datamined charts and i would really like to discuss:
"if you can beat the game"

[/ QUOTE ]

You need 30,000 hands at a level before knowing your general winrate, and 100,000 hands at a level before knowing your specific winrate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Such a crock.

Assume 18BB/100 standard deviation, which I understand is normal if you work it out right. Then over a 100,000 hand sample your standard error is
18/sqrt(1000) = 0.57

so with 95% confidence you know your winrate to within plus/minus 1.14BB/100

That is not particularly specific.

I've said this before and I will say it again. You will never, never know your winrate. Just spend the money.

Guy.

[timoK]

[ QUOTE ]
Just spend the money.


[/ QUOTE ]

word!

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]

TBH I've found these threads shocking. Not that I crush or anything like that but it was like one day EVERYBODY just decided to post that they weren't winning.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well they've made me feel a whole lot better. I seriously thought I was the only non-stupid person who couldn't beat these games for a ton of money. Remember my whiny thread a few days ago?

If this one had come first there would have been no issue.

Also, I haven't had a losing session since that thread, so you should all post a whinging thread like I did and you'll be golden.

Guy.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I haven't had a losing session since that thread, so you should all post a whinging thread like I did and you'll be golden.

[/ QUOTE ]

Done, and hopefully done...