200NL BB/100

[the_main]

[ QUOTE ]
My numbers are pretty weak. The last two months I have dropped 1 BB/100.



[/ QUOTE ]

I hear that... my rate is definitely not going in the right direction (1.09 this month). [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[solvine]

110k hands,
1.33bb/100

10 tabling, had a very bad moth last month, was down over a lot of hands, due to mainly bad play and greed

[D.L.M.]

my guess is that the nl200 game win rate will drop signifigantly in less than 3 months. so play play play while you still can.!

[GiantBuddha]

[ QUOTE ]
my guess is that the nl200 game win rate will drop signifigantly in less than 3 months. so play play play while you still can.!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why's that? I was just about to go over to stars.

[Belok]

BeatPurdue - Your W$SD is absolutely awful over such a large sample. It looks like you've been running like hell for months. Do you think that's the case, or does your style just get you to showdown with weak hands a bit more frequently?

Honestly, the way these #s look, it seems like 100NL is more profitable than 200NL...even in terms of $/hr.

A friend of mine beats 100NL for 7-8ptbb/100 over a huge sample (500k+ hands). My WR at 100 has hovered between 3 and 4ptbb/100 over the last 200k or so...but I'm really not trying as hard as I should... Even the best of the best at 200NL dont seem to make more than 4ptbb...

God i miss partypoker [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
my guess is that the nl200 game win rate will drop signifigantly in less than 3 months. so play play play while you still can.!

[/ QUOTE ]

You really think you will last 3 months before going broke?

[1p0kerboy]

*Sigh* Posting WRs in this thread without big enough sample sizes is pointless.

I think the games will go through a period where they become less profitable. This might discourage some of you.

What I have noticed, though, is I don't really see an increase in the number of good players. There just seems to be less terrible players and more average-but-beatable players.

As far as having a higher hourly rate at NL100 than NL200 that may be the case BUT these things usually work themselves out on their own. In other words, players will end up shuffling themselves around accordingly. Also its possible that whoever is making this observation doesn't have a strong enough game to compete past 100NL or a big enough sample size.

[D.L.M.]

Nl200 has much fewer "fish" than nl 100. so that game offers a much higher winrate. at nl200 you are lucky to find 1 fish at a table, where as nl100 i consider many of the regualars fish to feed off of.

I think that the nl200 is beatable, but the game is much more different than youd think. Youlld notice that when you start to play in certain pots, where a nl200 reg knows what goin on, and nl100 reg is just using his playbook and will never adjust.

there is also my round # theory of fish, and why they play the levels they play. I have played nl from 10nl-1000nl. and what i have noticed is that the fish intersting enough all flock towards round # limits.

basically nl100- very fishy, and of course any leve lower
nl200-600- alot more pros on there way up, and why would a fish choose to lose 200 at a time instead of 100. 100 just sounds better!
nl1000- filled with rich dummys, semi ok players who won a tourney, and sharks. why would a rich dummy say to himself"hey i wanna go lay down 400, 600 bucks and do some gambling", they dont, they say ,hey im goona put a grand down and show these sharks whos boss!

round # theory.

and poker boy you better hope i dont have to move down. or ill be a royal pain in your ass down there.

[Jurrr]

These are bad times and I agree with DLM that games will get much tougher as long as the U.S. gov keeps eradicating the game we all love.

[curtains]

oh wow I got it to work