Hourly Rate, Table Selection and Number of Games per Hour. NLTRN

[theordinaryboy]

I have been doing some thought of late over which is the best way to play HUSNG's. As they are what i predominently play i want to make sure i am playing in the most profitable manner.

At the moment i have a monthly subscription with sharkscope and use explicit table selection where normally i will only play someone who has -10% ROI or worse, or have a much lower average stake than the game they are sitting in. This leads to me waiting around a bit more than most players i imagine. To compensate this i play a wider variety of limits, from 30's to 100's.

However, i am rethinking this and considering that just sitting first and playing whoever sits down may be better as the drop in ROI may be compensated by the increase in hourly rate.

I did some crude maths and worked out roughly that if you played the 50's and aimed for a $25 an hour hourly rate, then you would need the following win rates for the number of games you are playing:

5 games = 56%
6 games = 55%
7 games = 54.5%
8 games = 54%
9 games = 53.75%
10 games = 53.5%

These percentages are for turbo games, you can add 1% to all these totals for regular's.

Now i suppose the question i am asking is say i play 5 games per hour table selecting heavily will i be more likely to hit a 56% win rate than if i play say 8 games against randomly determined opponents and try and hit a 54% win rate.

I have also included 27% rakeback which i get at fulltilt to these results if we want to attribute this to poker stars or to someone who doesnt have rakeback you can just add 0.5% to the totals as a rough rule of them.

Any thoughts and suggestions and if anyone wants to berate my maths feel free.

[ChicagoRy]

You're not going to enjoy the variance at most of those winrates, but it's nice that you're pointing out to everybody just how profitable these games are, even without great ROIs.

[theordinaryboy]

Ok so variance will be bad so bankroll needs to be bigger to compensate. In your experience, is it better to play more games or only pick the good games?

[ChicagoRy]

Better to play more games/tables at a buyin you can kill than grinding out swings at a higher buyin (usually makes more sense $/hour but definitely mentally).

A good mix of grinding a level you're good at and game selecting higher games when they are juicy is what I'm working on doing right now.

[jay_shark]

At 5 games/hour at the $50+2.5 , winning 56% with a 5% rake (we'll include rakeback at the end) , you will earn 100*0.56 -52.5 = 3.5/sng . So 5 sng's per hour , you will earn $17.5/hour . With 27% rakeback , we add $3.375 which brings our hourly profits to $20.875.

[theordinaryboy]

jay that is true, however, the figures i gave were for the turbo's $55, rather than the regular's $50. I did note that you add 1% for the regular's so, 57% at 50's should give roughly $25 an hour.

chicago, i like the idea of what you said, grinding one level but checking the higher limits for the juicy games when possible that is what i will try for a smallish sample of say 200-500 games.

[daveT]

With a 53%-55% wr, I can't see any reason why you should stop table selecting.

[TNixon]

[ QUOTE ]
With a 53%-55% wr, I can't see any reason why you should stop table selecting.

[/ QUOTE ]
qft

Although, to be honest, on full tilt at the $50s, table selecting doesn't really seem to be any different than sitting first. Probably 75% or more of the people who join my games have big negatives anyway.

[TNixon]

Also, it's going to be EXTREMELY tough (if not completely impossible) to get 5 games an hour at the regulars unless you're at least 2-tabling. I hit somewhere around 10 an hour 3-tabling.