So I want to...

[Fryguy]

Earn $20/hr pre-rakeback. I've played a reasonable amount this year, 120,000 hands or so so far. I ran really bad recently, so I've begun to take a break and think about what I want out of the game. Grinding out 30,000 hands a month just isn't practical for me anymore, especially with me getting a job soon. Poker has switched from primary source of income for a college student to a secondary source of income for a working class citizen.

I play strictly limit, although am willing to switch over to NL if it's much more practical for what I'm looking to do. I am an average multitabler; been 6-8 tabling full most of the year, although my comfort zone is more in the 4-5 range, 3-4 for shorthanded play. I'm a competent player up to the upper levels of micro-limits and lower levels of small stakes (I can beat 2/4).

My goal is to make $20 per hour before rakeback/bonuses in the easiest way possible with the least amount of variance. Assume 60 hands per hour at full-ring, and 100/hr at 6-max. Assuming an average of 2-2.5bb/100, this has the following breakdown:

--Limit--
.50/1 - not practical
1/2 - 8 full or 5 sh (probably out of comfort zone)
2/4 - 5 full or 3 sh

Assuming a 7ptbb/100 winrate at NL (NL would probably be higher than this, but I want to be on the conservative side)

.25/.50 - 5 full
.50/1 - 3 full
1/2 - 1-2 full

First of all, do all of these numbers seem right? To me, the sweet spots seem to be 2/4 Limit and .50/1 NL. 1/2 NL would almost certainly be too hard for me for at least a period of time while I learned it.

So what approach should I take?

[tom10167]

All I read is that you are a strictly limit player.

2/4 SH

[jmillerdls]

You are not going to be making 7ptbb/100 at NL as a strictly Limit player. At least not at NL100 or higher anytime soon.

[MrWookie]

I dunno. I've recently started dabbling in NL100 6 max. It's really not that hard for a limit player to pick up, at least one who has a good understanding of implied odds, hand reading, hand protection, etc. My win rate has nowhere near converged, but I bet he could pull off 7. OTOH, taking up 2/4 6max is probably the safest thing to do. It's going to be profitable for you, you know this, and you'll be comfortable.

[Fryguy]

the only issue with 2/4 shorthanded is that while I'll be making the money, I'd like to make it with the least amount of variance possible. Limit shorthanded is probably the highest variance game possible. I'd like to have a semi-regular earning rate.
The reason i considered $100nl (and possibly eventually $200nl) is for 2 primary reasons:

1a. I don't have to play too many tables
1b. I can do this playing pretty much ABC while I do other things; I wouldn't really have to focus that much
2. It has a lot less variance than 2/4 shorthanded.