Everything we've always wanted to ask about NL thread... - Page 2

4_2_it · #11 07-31-2007, 05:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
12PTBB/100

wth?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not sustainable. 5 PTBB/100 over 200k hands would be considered excellent.

kaby · #12 07-31-2007, 05:13 PM

I'm assuming that's for US players and non-US players can do better?

Wetdog · #13 07-31-2007, 05:17 PM

phydaux, in another thread you mention the "rule of 5 & 10." I always muck that (even suited), but I doubt that's what you were talking about. Could you expound here about that?

edit: I kant spel.

4_2_it · #14 07-31-2007, 05:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'm assuming that's for US players and non-US players can do better?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is news to me. Plenty of Euro 2+2ers play on Stars, Tilt and UB. If Party was that much more lucrative, they would be there exclusively.

Victor · #15 07-31-2007, 05:28 PM

"But the BR requiorments would be much differant. To play 20/40 limit, you'd want a BR of $10k-$15k. Playing 5/10 NL, you'd want a BR or $20k-$30k."

rofl. i wouldnt play 20-40 without 40k roll separate from rent and savings and all that.

sixfour · #16 07-31-2007, 05:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
phydaux, in another thread you mention the "rule of 5 & 10." I always muck that (even suited), but I doubt that's what you were talking about. Could you expound here about that?

[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC it's something that's mentioned in Ciaffone and Reuben where if you're considering calling a preflop raise in position with a speculative hand (i.e. pp's, sc's), you've got an easy call if it's for less than 5% of your stack and an easy fold if it's for more than 10%. Anything in between you need to use judgment.

KurtSF · #17 07-31-2007, 05:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
"But the BR requiorments would be much differant. To play 20/40 limit, you'd want a BR of $10k-$15k. Playing 5/10 NL, you'd want a BR or $20k-$30k."

rofl. i wouldnt play 20-40 without 40k roll separate from rent and savings and all that.

[/ QUOTE ]

It all depends on your acceptable risk and your willingness to move down. So if you can't move down because you can't make your nut at a lower level, and if losing your roll means you're out of the game, then BR requirements will be much MUCH higher for a pro than what is acceptable for someone with another source of income and/or the ability to just move up and down limits at will.

I've heard some NL pros advocate a BR as high as 100BIs. Everyone's acceptable risk is different.

4_2_it · #18 07-31-2007, 05:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard some NL pros advocate a BR as high as 100BIs. Everyone's acceptable risk is different.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most of the SSNL regulars probably play with anywhere between 30-50 buy-ins.

MrWookie · #19 07-31-2007, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
12PTBB/100

wth?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not sustainable. 5 PTBB/100 over 200k hands would be considered excellent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh. That's news to me. I thought 5 was the "solid" range and 7-10 was the "excellent" range. That puts a damper on Kurt's enthusiasm for the relative win rate/SD calculations for limit vs. NL.

KurtSF · #20 07-31-2007, 05:57 PM

It is what it is.

I can get 3ptBB/100 out of FR NL micro limits, so I envision 4 as an "excellent" player. But when I've stated such on these boards I've had multiple folks jump on me that they sustain 6-8, yes at full ring. Also, the number of tables will drastically affect winrate, where its cut in half for a 12-tabler but they are still making more hourly than a 3-tabler.

I thought I remembered threads where the top 2+2ers were pulling 12ptBB/100 out of 6-max games. Anyone?

But its best not to judge based on others' results, or against some standard posted on the internets. Truthfully, anything over 0ptBB/100 is good, and just put in the hands and use your own winrate and standard deviation for these calculations.

$0.02