Good winrates for 100NL
 

I know this has been answered 100 times but I couldn't find it anywhere... What is a good winrate in terms of bb/100 hands... My PT says 14.94... is this solid? Also the bb on PT is big bets isn't it?

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

14.94ptbb/100 = running good, 7-8ptbb/100 is something that's sustainable over a large sample if you are very good.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

15 bb/ 100 is very good. even 8 would be solid

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
14.94ptbb/100 = running good, 7-8ptbb/100 is something that's sustainable over a large sample if you are very good.

[/ QUOTE ]
15ptbb/100 is def. possible for very good players. However, those players are making good $ at 1000NL+

If you're >6 over a decent sample, you def. should move up.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you're >6 over a decent sample, you def. should move up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm new to NL (but not L, where it would be stupid high) so for the more experienced players,
what's a ballpark figure for <font color="red"> "a decent sample"</font>?

Thanks.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

I'd say you know if you are winning by 30k-50k hands.

To be close to your real winrate a decent sample would be 100k hands or more.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

100k hands is a decent sample, and even thats a lil small probably. 8+ is a good winrate probably

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

at least 30k, but you should be able to recognize whether you've been running hot or not and adjust properly (be honest with yourself here).

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

K thanks for the replies.

I can go along with the 30K, that makes sense to me. I don't need winrate to the nearest quarter BB. I just need to know when I can start to put it around a BB or so.

100K sounds more like a limit figure, or a NL to the nearest X.x.

I'm curious how far out a winrate could be in say the 10-15K sample size. It takes me a dogs age to play 30K.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

30k is still way shortterm, 100k would probably put you within MAYBE 1-2 BBs. Variance is huge in this game, Rotter used to say this about me, and know I'll say it about others.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
30k is still way shortterm, 100k would probably put you within MAYBE 1-2 BBs. Variance is huge in this game, Rotter used to say this about me, and know I'll say it about others.

[/ QUOTE ]

100K and you're saying MAYBE 2 BB's out?

I didn't switch to NL under this understanding. I switched FOR the reduced variance compared to limit. Is this really the case?

Have I seen too many upward graphs from NL players, after the Lollercoasters of minbet players, and gotten a skewed perception?

Of the top of my head I would have figured a 30K would put you 1-1.5 around your winrate 99%+ of the time.

Dunno what to think now.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
Of the top of my head I would have figured a 30K would put you 1-1.5 around your winrate 99%+ of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not even close, I ran at 10ptbb/100 for the first 30K and I've been running at 3ptbb/100 (20K) since then. 100K will definitely give you a close number

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]

Of the top of my head I would have figured a 30K would put you 1-1.5 around your winrate 99%+ of the time.

Dunno what to think now.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is way, way off.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

OK guys. Thanks. I guess I better rein in my "your doing x PTBB" thinking for a while.

I'd like to get a look at some bad variance graphs from good NL winning players just to see what can happen.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

check out BBV [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Seriously though, 30K is nothing. Lots of people play more than 30K hands in a month. Many of these are good winning players, but even these guys having a losing month here and there. If a longterm winner can *lose* over the course of 30k hands, it should put things in perspective for you.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
My PT says 14.94... is this solid? Also the bb on PT is big bets isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. At .5-1 and 14.9 ptBB/100, you are making $29.8 every 100 hands.

I have run 14 ptBB/100 over 10,000 hand stretches before. It doesn't last for me. People adapt to what you are doing, which is usually stealing them blind, or you stop catching cards.

When the "stealing them blind" and "catching cards" methods go south, you are in for some rocky stretches.

I agree with others that 7-8 ptBB/100 is achievable by very good players, and that 100K hands is what you need to get an idea of where you are at a given level.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

There was a thread where a gentlemen posted his program that calculates variance in winrates over X amount of hands. It was actually very interesting.

The only thing I remember is that if 10,000 players all have a long-term win-rate of 0, after 1,000,000 hands they were within +/- 2 PTBB/100 2 standard deviations out. In English, it was very possible for someone win a "natural" win-rate of say... 4 PTBB/100 to run at 2 PTBB/100 over 1 million hands.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

Most players (with a typical standard deviation numbers 40-50bb/100) need over 200K hands to say with a reasonable degree of confidence that their "true" win rate is + or - 1 PTBB. 30K hands is pretty short term. For example, take a player with a standard deviation of 50 PTBB/100. If this player had a sample win rate of 8 PTBB/100 over 100k hands, the best he would be able to say that his "true" win rate is somewhere between 5 and 11 with 95% confidence.

The best indicator of what is achievable comes from data mining sources. I'm not sure what these sources indicate for 100NL, but I would be surprised if there were very many players on US sites doing better than 9-10 PTBB/100 over a large number of hands. Many self reports are inflated.

Lucky

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

If I were to pull a number out of my bum for what percentage of players can run a "true" win-rate at above 9 PTBB/100 at $100 NL or higher, it would be 0.05%. 5 people for every 10,000 players.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
If I were to pull a number out of my bum for what percentage of players can run a "true" win-rate at above 9 PTBB/100 at $100 NL or higher, it would be 0.05%. 5 people for every 10,000 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if some guy did run at 9+ PTBB/100 at 100NL he would not be playing 100NL for long. People run hot for 20-30K hands and move up so we never really get to see what happens long-term.

Lucky

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I were to pull a number out of my bum for what percentage of players can run a "true" win-rate at above 9 PTBB/100 at $100 NL or higher, it would be 0.05%. 5 people for every 10,000 players.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if some guy did run at 9+ PTBB/100 at 100NL he would not be playing 100NL for long. People run hot for 20-30K hands and move up so we never really get to see what happens long-term.

Lucky

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. On top of that, I don't think you'd see anyone other than an established nose-bleed stakes player beating up the $100 NL game for more than 8-9 PTBB/100 long-term.

Think about all the bad beats you take regularly. An "average" day would have to be like 15-20 PTBB/100 to make up for the days where everything gets cracked and you book a loss.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

I'd be a little surprised if 15 PTBB/100 is possible at NL100 just because of the rake. Poker Tracker did add an option to show your winrate in regular big blinds instead of PTBB. Does OP have this checked? Either winrate is very solid, but I would encourage anyone making 15 PTBB/100 over even 30k+ hands at NL100 to move up.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
but I would be surprised if there were very many players on US sites doing better than 9-10 PTBB/100 over a large number of hands.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes.
[ QUOTE ]
Many self reports are inflated.

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably, but that hasn't much to do with your previous statement.

There aren't many ppl. who are doing better than 9PTBB/100 over a large sample, because those who'd be able to do that, move up WAAAY before ever reaching that "large" sample.

If you're winning 9PTBB/100 over 100k hands at 100NL you're just [censored] stupid.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd be a little surprised if 15 PTBB/100 is possible at NL100 just because of the rake. Poker Tracker did add an option to show your winrate in regular big blinds instead of PTBB. Does OP have this checked? Either winrate is very solid, but I would encourage anyone making 15 PTBB/100 over even 30k+ hands at NL100 to move up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying they would sustain 15 PTBB/100... I'm saying that their "average" winning day would have to be 15-20 PTBB/100 to make up for the suckouts and coolers so that their overall win-rate would be 9 PTBB/100.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you're winning 9PTBB/100 over 100k hands at 100NL you're just [censored] stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah - I already made this point.

Probably if you want to see what is achievable the best bet would be data mine a site for one month and take look at the win rates of all the players with a large number hands (I don't know what this number would be). Then take the average win rate over the top 10%. Goofy Baller has been mining 200NL at FT and the top win rates not impressive by self report standards. Anyway, if anyone is interested Goofy made the information available in Part I of the March Cheese Thread.

Lucky

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

As for possible winrates I realise you're probably all discounting a couple of things because you're very likely talking about a player doing one thing. High multi-tabling.

A player playing 6+ tables is missing out on two major things that will significantly reduce his PTBB/100 (just as it would in limit).
1. Reads. There's no way you can play at half a dozen tables and get the same number and accuracy of reads as someone playing a couple. It's just not possible.
2. Game selection. Likewise if you're playing at this many tables you can't be anywhere near as game selective. You just have to play in worse games to get on this many tables.

Personally:
1. When I sit I'm usually there because of one or two bad players. Most of my focus is on discovering the crux of their flaws (if I don't already know them) and taking their money off them by exploiting them. And this can be done way more effectively at 2 tables than 6.
2. I can sit in the best 2 or 3 games on the site because
a. I don't need to find 6 tables+
b. I can watch tables enough to only sit at good tables, and leave bad tables very quickly. There's no way someone playing a lot of tables can do this as effectively.


Personally I've always only played in 1-3 tables at a time. For years. Because I'm as interested in improving my game and getting away from ABC as making money. Sure I could make more at 6-10. But that's short term. Aba mentions exactly the same thing in his well article.
ATM I'm sitting at one table more than 3. With 2 being the average.

This is even more important for me atm because I'm learning NL, and because reads are exponentially more important for profit than they are at limit.


So yes, I don't think you can compare the potential winrates for someone playing 2 tables to someone doing 8.
It's apples and oranges.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

alot of this info is way off

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
alot of this info is way off

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, well this really helps. You've got me totally convinced now.

Ya'know a lot of this new modern 2+2 "give the answer in a line without giving the reasoning" really gets me.

No wonder the quality of the forums has dropped in the last couple of years.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

god u run almost as awesome as me. I run 8.9 over 68K between 100 and 200. I R drunk wahahahah. ship teh over 10k roll!!!!

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

30k hands is pretty much nothing when it comes to determining winrate - ive run at 10+ ptbb for 30k hands and also broken even for 30k hands. A winrate of over 6 ptBB/100 is damn good over a few 100k hands and nobody seems to be able to produce a graph really showing anything better than that.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

OP,

the answer is texas

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
30k hands is pretty much nothing when it comes to determining winrate - ive run at 10+ ptbb for 30k hands and also broken even for 30k hands. A winrate of over 6 ptBB/100 is damn good over a few 100k hands and nobody seems to be able to produce a graph really showing anything better than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

give me 2 months?

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

I think a way of addressing this question, which I would be interested in, is to have some members post their graphs and/or PT screen shots.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think a way of addressing this question, which I would be interested in, is to have some members post their graphs and/or PT screen shots.

[/ QUOTE ]
That would be super-interesting, if anyone's willing to do it.

It's the graphs that really interest me because of the added variance data.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think a way of addressing this question, which I would be interested in, is to have some members post their graphs and/or PT screen shots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im in a braggy/happy/wasted from the bars mood.

http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/4...thefacebn9.jpg

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

I went back and looked at goofy's post. It is in reference to 200NL at FT. Goofy mines 12 tables 24/7 (I believe) and the results below are only for the the first 2 months of this year.

[ QUOTE ]
- I have 7 players with &gt;24k hands (up to 39k hands) and their winrates range from -2ptbb to +3.2ptbb
- I have La Jolla Shores at 5.7ptbb over 24k hands and Olgi at 4.5ptbb over 23k hands
- 15 of the 16 players in the range of 15k to 23k hands all have winrates under 4ptbb, except for...
- ...I have Spear1 at 8.7ptbb over 15k hands

Less than 15k and you start getting less stastically valid samples (and I don't have a higher winrate than 9ptbb until you get down to 10k hands). Even 15k isn't that great, but I only have so many hands on people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
Im in a braggy/happy/wasted from the bars mood.

[/ QUOTE ]

So assuming that you have a SD of around 40PTBB/100 your "true" win rate could be as low as 4 or as high as 12 (this is the 99% confidence interval). Seriously though - good work over 60k hands.

Lucky

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think a way of addressing this question, which I would be interested in, is to have some members post their graphs and/or PT screen shots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im in a braggy/happy/wasted from the bars mood.

http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/4...thefacebn9.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

Prepare to be flamed for being a "nit" LOL

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

[ QUOTE ]


Prepare to be flamed for being a "nit" LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

most regs at this forum already know im one of the hugest nits in the world.

Re: Good winrates for 100NL
 

I run about that.. not quite as tight though.. been trying to loosen up more on button/co but I end up getting 3 bet like crazy and doing some stupid stuff.

Very nice winrate though.