What ROI is achievable playing 50/1

dvdfan

Hi,

I used to play STT's but changed recently to cash games. I like to have a target when i play so i know how im doing. For example playing $20 STT's i knew making 15% ROI was average and 20%+ was good

Now im playing 50/1 mostly 2tabling or 3 tabling, how do you rate your play or whats a good goal for a 50/1 player. Do you go by a $xx per hour rate or whats the best way to judge, whats average, whats good etc

I play full ring btw on tribeca

bohsman

bb/100 is the way to keep track, 5+ is sustainable. I dont play 9handed so not sure but would probably be slightly lower.

peeko

Get yourself Pokertracker and PAHUD if you don't all ready.

They are a great way of telling how you are doing (by the hour, or PTBB/100).

I'm currently making about $20 per hour 2 tabling .50/1 thats running at about 5.5BB/100. It's ok for me, but good players can make about 10BB/100.

EDIT: Playing 6 max also.

phantom_lord

you go by bb/100 in pt.

Drakar

bb/100 is a decent measure if you want to compare with players at the same level. bb/hour is obviously better but as a player you play a small part in the difference between those two (as the difference between you playing slow and fast are normally a fraction of the total table time).

The question asked doesn't relate to the below, but it's interesting (for me!). More generally is a player making 10bb/100 on 0.10/0.20 doing better than one making 8bb/100 playing 1/2? No (as they make less actual money in the same time).
So should your goal be averaging the highest bb/100? No, as mentioned above bb/hr would be a better measure. But even at that, if someone plays say 10 hands a day, concentrates on each one really well and averages 10bb/100 does that mean they are doing better than one who plays 1,000 hands a day and averages 8bb/100? From that one might arrive at the conclusion that maximising actual money made should be your goal, but of course that has to take in your hourly time too. So it kind of depends on how valuable your time is. $$/hr is a nice metric of your skill (the above example where you might have been watching the way players on the table play for a few hours before your 10 hands not withstanding), but of course total $$ might be seen as a measure of your success. The problem with this of course is the variance makes it difficult to predict.

Ste05

Drakar wrote:

The question asked doesn't relate to the below, but it's interesting (for me!). More generally is a player making 10bb/100 on 0.10/0.20 doing better than one making 8bb/100 playing 1/2? No (as they make less actual money in the same time).

10 BB/100 at .10/.20 = $2/ 100 hands (or .20 x 10) (This is the same as 5 PTBB/100)
8 BB/100 at 1/2 = $16 / 100 hands (or 2 x 8) (This is the same as 4 PTBB/100)

(I used straight forward Big Blinds instead of confusing the issue with PT Big bets to show that the actual money won at the 1/2 level is substantially higher than the actual money won at .10/.20)

So BB/100 is relative to the level you are playing.

At .50/1, I think a win-rate of over 10 is achievable if a player runs well and plays well over the short to medium term but will usually move up levels before this evens itself out, however over the long term if you are beating the game for anything over 5 PTBB/100 it's very good.

dvdfan

Thanks im:
2.59 BB/100
1.44 BB/Hr
$5.29 per hour over 20 hours or about 2,000 hands

Overall im 18/8/1.23

I suspect i need alot more hands to get a better idea plus ive just made the transitition from STT's to cash games and have never really played cash before other than a small bit of dabbling so im learning daily from my mistakes by posting hands etc and im trying to read a few poker books in between so hopefully i can improve my stats.

Thanks for the clarifications