please post your winrate/nl 100-nl 200

[aislephive]

Yeah the more tables you add the lower your winrate is going to be long term for sure. My MT ratio is about 6 overall, although it's more like 7-8 recently.

[PartyScout]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah the more tables you add the lower your winrate is going to be long term for sure. My MT ratio is about 6 overall, although it's more like 7-8 recently.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is one of my weaker points in poker im useless 3+ tables i like to play make reads ect more tables=less reads/concentraion ect ect

[fluorescenthippo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How was he 1.8ptbb/100 for the first 400k hands if the graph says he broke even over that stretch?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can lose money and be positive in BB/100 and vice versa if you're playing multiple limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

but shouldnt there be weighted averages for your limits? this just cant be true.

[FoldEqu1ty]

My recent graph is 8-10 tables fwiw, and there's some really healthy tilt in there as well. IMO your winrate per-table doesn't have to drop at all if you have sufficient raw reflexes to play the same number of hands and can think quickly without making gigantic mistakes.

However your overall winrate will certainly drop because of the lower fishiness of your 7th, 10th tables etc. But provided you can find 10 fishy tables (insert Party joke here) I honestly believe the cap for your 10 tabling winrate can be the same as your 1-tabling winrate.

[cbloom]

[ QUOTE ]
My recent graph is 8-10 tables fwiw, and there's some really healthy tilt in there as well. IMO your winrate per-table doesn't have to drop at all if you have sufficient raw reflexes to play the same number of hands and can think quickly without making gigantic mistakes.

However your overall winrate will certainly drop because of the lower fishiness of your 7th, 10th tables etc. But provided you can find 10 fishy tables (insert Party joke here) I honestly believe the cap for your 10 tabling winrate can be the same as your 1-tabling winrate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. On 8+ tables you can certainly play a solid mechanical game if you're good, but no way you can make all the little adjustments that really optimize your play against the exact lineup and stack sizes at each table.

I've said this before but I believe that a really good player could make around 15 PTBB/100 on 4 tables and there's no way you can match that with more tables because it requires too much study of your opponents patterns and history.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How was he 1.8ptbb/100 for the first 400k hands if the graph says he broke even over that stretch?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can lose money and be positive in BB/100 and vice versa if you're playing multiple limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

but shouldnt there be weighted averages for your limits? this just cant be true.

[/ QUOTE ]

just a simple example, lets say you played both 100NL and 200NL in a day.

100NL- +$155
200NL- -$200

overall: -$45, +27.5ptbbs

[DanJ.]

all 100nl.

[fluorescenthippo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How was he 1.8ptbb/100 for the first 400k hands if the graph says he broke even over that stretch?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can lose money and be positive in BB/100 and vice versa if you're playing multiple limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

but shouldnt there be weighted averages for your limits? this just cant be true.

[/ QUOTE ]

just a simple example, lets say you played both 100NL and 200NL in a day.

100NL- +$155
200NL- -$200

overall: -$45, +27.5ptbbs

[/ QUOTE ]


can you show the math? and are you assuming an equal amount of hands at each limit?

nvm i see what you did. what it should do is assume the average limit is 1.5bb. so 3ptbb. -45 / 3 = - 15ptbb/100.

[dirtylobster]

[ QUOTE ]
all 100nl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you [censored] serious??

[DanJ.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
all 100nl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you [censored] serious??

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, 60 buyin downswings are a bit of a pain, but you get used to it after a while.