Hourly rates... - Page 2

januarymute · #11 02-10-2006, 03:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
hmmm. can you post a graph of this [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Any graph I post could obviously just be fake, so it won't prove anything. You know where you can find such a graph, though...
At any rate, I only posted the 500/hr rate as a joke in response to your first reply in this thread; I'm under no illusions that the winrate I've had thus far in 2006 is going to last.

grandgnu · #12 02-10-2006, 04:37 PM

I know I'm not a PLO player, but, at limit Omaha 8 up to the 5/10 level I'm currently fluctuating between $25-$30/hr.

I anticipate that when I eventually get a 2nd monitor and play 6-10 tables regularly that my hourly rate should be $30-$40/hr. I think that's on the conservative side, since it doesn't take into account my eventual hope to play frequently at the 15/30 and 20/40 level (and yes, there are fish there who are just as bad as the $0.50/$1 players, I just don't have the roll to play there yet)

Then again, my hourly rate is subject to change, if I keep raising before the flop and getting called by 6/9/9/K that spikes quads on the turn when I make Aces full. Ugh.

Mendacious · #13 02-10-2006, 05:50 PM

These two posts probably cost you about $100. I guess Smash gave you back the car.

Mendacious · #14 02-10-2006, 06:00 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I know I'm not a PLO player, but, at limit Omaha 8 up to the 5/10 level I'm currently fluctuating between $25-$30/hr.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the reasons I prefer PL08 to Limit, is that I perceive you can make hourly rates that are much higher relative to your perceived risk. By that I mean I can sit at a $100 table for 4 rounds if the cards run badly, and I am only down $6. If I sit at a 5/10 table I am down $30. Yet, I expect the hourly win rates are not that different. Personally I can't stand the thought of sitting down and 4 tabling and getting no cards for a few rounds and being stuck for $100. When you combine this with the drastically reduced ability to control pot sizes and chase in Limit, and I found that on a day to day basis my variance was MUCH greater in Limit than in PL, and higher variance makes me play worse and enjoy it less.

grandgnu · #15 02-10-2006, 06:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know I'm not a PLO player, but, at limit Omaha 8 up to the 5/10 level I'm currently fluctuating between $25-$30/hr.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the reasons I prefer PL08 to Limit, is that I perceive you can make hourly rates that are much higher relative to your perceived risk. By that I mean I can sit at a $100 table for 4 rounds if the cards run badly, and I am only down $6. If I sit at a 5/10 table I am down $30. Yet, I expect the hourly win rates are not that different. Personally I can't stand the thought of sitting down and 4 tabling and getting no cards for a few rounds and being stuck for $100. When you combine this with the drastically reduced ability to control pot sizes and chase in Limit, and I found that on a day to day basis my variance was MUCH greater in Limit than in PL, and higher variance makes me play worse and enjoy it less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good points. With my viewpoint, it hurts a lot less if you get quartered in limit, since there's usually enough other players along for the ride to make up for your loss. But in Pot Limit, I expect it's a much bigger deal.

Plus, in limit I can pretty much play on auto-pilot most of the time, while in Pot Limit I'd likely have to pay significantly more attention to the other players, thus causing me to reduce the number of tables and hands per hour I could get in (and that hurts my rakeback figures)

odomination · #16 02-10-2006, 11:19 PM

SNAP!!!

Mr_J · #17 02-10-2006, 11:32 PM

8tabling with three tables of 2/4 and 3/6, and two of 5/10 all at 2bb/100, I get $49/hr before rakeback, and ~$74 after rakeback.

1.5bb/100 would give you $37 before rakeback and $61 after.

Three tables of 50PL and 100PL at 15bb/100 and 10bb/100 would give you $53 before rakeback, and ~$60 after.

grandgnu · #18 02-11-2006, 12:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
8tabling with three tables of 2/4 and 3/6, and two of 5/10 all at 2bb/100, I get $49/hr before rakeback, and ~$74 after rakeback.

1.5bb/100 would give you $37 before rakeback and $61 after.

Three tables of 50PL and 100PL at 15bb/100 and 10bb/100 would give you $53 before rakeback, and ~$60 after.

[/ QUOTE ]

You'll also likely earn more points from the site you're at for playing 8 tables of limit as opposed to 3 tables of pot limit. Depending on the site you're at, the items you can purchase with those points may add up significantly.....

Mr_J · #19 02-11-2006, 01:06 AM

I'd think that 2bb/100 at 2/4 to 5/10 is also more achievable than 10bb/100 at 100PL.

Table selection shouldn't matter as much with PL though since you can isolate the fish better.

Mendacious, doesn't ribbo 6 table 200PL?? Isn't any table playable as long as there are a couple of live ones??

Jorge10 · #20 02-11-2006, 02:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
What a set-up for a Fatballz $500 an hour brag thread.

For some realism, I'm a 12bb/100 player on the $1bb ($100 buy-in) tables. I play 3-4 tables at a time, and make 5.6bb per hour. I believe that is essentially between $33-$44 an hour.

I find that virtually every site has enough action at this level to find quality games at this leve. I think at the $200 level you lose the quantity of selection a bit and the play is somewhat tougher, above this level, $400-$2000 you are pretty much limited to Party and Stars, and there are no guarantees that you can multi-table on good tables. Notwithstanding the great success of Wintermute/Fatballz, I think your options in PL08 are pretty limited above the $200 level because of the size of the player pool. Above the $200 level I think you need to be flat out a very very good player if you want to sustain any winning, and if you are that good, there are other games with much greater availability. Just my .02

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting post, and I agree with this completely.

I dont do any table selection at all. I will just play any 4 tables of 200 PLO8 if I can find them, which I usually cant, or combine 200 and 100 as its usually the case. I find that a bad PLO8 is boring and very unprofitable, its mostly a struggle to take stabs at pots no one wants because people are just too tight when the games are bad. Getting 10bb/100 on a bad game is obviously impossible, I think a limit player would have a bigger win rate than someone who plays at bad tables, its that slow. Also PLO8 has a huge jump from 400 to 2k because currently in party there is literally nothing in between. The 600 and 1000 tables rarely get going if ever. So you must jump from 400 to 2k buy in tables. I think if you want to win small and just build a roll, PLO8 is fine, but if you want something more its going to be very difficult, unless you want to specialize in short handed play.