[ChicagoRy]

I think your comparisons are a little off base here.

If somebody just started their major and got an internship (not really any money but experience) they would be considered successful or "they should be happy."

If somebody just starts their poker career and is met with success aka positive winrate in husngs over a decent sample, they "should be happy" most likely.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's not like people are telling others in this forum "hey, you've played poker for 4 years, congrats on a 2% roi, you should be happy."

I don't think that's really the focal point of your thread, but I think those comparisons are off by too much to ignore.



Another thing, I think a lot of players respond to new posters asking about winrates at lower stakes games over small sample sizes in those "you're winning be happy" ways because your winrate shouldn't really matter that much to you if you're still in a major learning part of your "playing career."

Sure, you want to see 100k hand samples from big winners and see what is and isn't possible, but it's kind of pointless. Take my word for it, if you're good and play a lot you'll make a ton of money. Until then, worry about learning the game and improving so you have that chance, not whether it's possible to beat 10/20 HU for 11bb/100 or 15bb/100.

Also, all this stuff has been asked sooooo many times that it's very annoying to see a new post everyday with "what's a realistic hu cash winrate for 100NL." If you use the search function you would see plenty of threads with plenty of "15bb/100" type answers that you say you want and aren't getting. It's been covered.