|
|
#11
11-01-2006, 10:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Also, my hourly rate over this sample is about $40/hr, is this pretty standard? My MT ratio is close to 4, so its about $10/table/hr. [/ QUOTE ] OOC, why only 4-tabling? [/ QUOTE ] Thats just the avg, I play between 4-8 now but sometimes I'll single table or 2-table for the hell of it. [/ QUOTE ] I see - have you noticed a difference in your winrate between your table range? [/ QUOTE ] Meh, I play a lot nittier when I'm 8-tabling vs 2-3 tabling. I also make a lot better reads when I play less tables. So the winrate is definitely higher with less tables I'd imagine, but the hourly is whats important and I'm sure that is better when I average 4-6 tables. 
|
|
#12
11-01-2006, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
the hourly is whats important and I'm sure that is better when I average 4-6 tables. [/ QUOTE ] I agree hourly is more important. That being said, if I were you, I would add tables before moving up. $40/hr is definitely nice, but playing 9-12 tables is where it's at. 9-12 tabling nl50, my hourly is higher than yours, and my standard deviation is probably much lower also. Just something to think about.
|
|
#14
11-01-2006, 11:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] the hourly is whats important and I'm sure that is better when I average 4-6 tables. [/ QUOTE ] I agree hourly is more important. That being said, if I were you, I would add tables before moving up. $40/hr is definitely nice, but playing 9-12 tables is where it's at. 9-12 tabling nl50, my hourly is higher than yours, and my standard deviation is probably much lower also. Just something to think about. [/ QUOTE ] I'm also trying to get better at poker so I can play like 5/10+ someday, so I'd rather keep it to like 8 tables maximum. Thanks for the advice though...that's pretty sick if you can beat 40/hr at NL50. What's your ptbb/100?
|
|
#15
11-01-2006, 11:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
Won $ at SD% would be better if it were a few percent higher.
|
|
#17
11-02-2006, 12:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
I only mention it because TillerMaN (and I respect his opinion and he plays as high stakes as 50-100NL) says it's one of the most important stats and that he doesn't know a winning player whose W$atSD% is less than 50.
|
|
#18
11-02-2006, 12:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
I'm also trying to get better at poker so I can play like 5/10+ someday, so I'd rather keep it to like 8 tables maximum. Thanks for the advice though...that's pretty sick if you can beat 40/hr at NL50. What's your ptbb/100? [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, it just goes to show you that volume is important too. I ran at 9-10ptbb 9-12 tabling party, MT ratio was probably around 8-9...just built a new computer last week and I'm having a few issues, so I havent reinstalled PT yet since I might get a new copy of windows and have to reinstall, dont want to waste a reg. code. I broke even the first week or so at Stars, but it's been good the past few days...my earn now is probably a little less, but ~1k hands/hr at 5ptbb is ~$50/hr at nl50. I have played nl1 regularly(50k+ hands, 4ptbb) and also have 20k hands at nl2, but I'm just not ready to be tossing that kind of money around, so I'm kicking it here and taking all the "gimme's" I can. Stress free poker. [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]
|
|
#19
11-02-2006, 12:55 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
I only mention it because TillerMaN (and I respect his opinion and he plays as high stakes as 50-100NL) says it's one of the most important stats and that he doesn't know a winning player whose W$atSD% is less than 50. [/ QUOTE ] Running good is very important, all players should try to do it. Some pt numbers you can manipulate, trying to maniupulate w$@sd to get it in a specific range is silly.
|
|
#20
11-02-2006, 12:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Quick NL100 stat checkup before I make the permanent move to NL200
[ QUOTE ]
I only mention it because TillerMaN (and I respect his opinion and he plays as high stakes as 50-100NL) says it's one of the most important stats and that he doesn't know a winning player whose W$atSD% is less than 50. [/ QUOTE ] I thought Aba's was like 48-49? Also, there are tons of winning players with W$atSD% less than 50% (mostly LAGs).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
