A realistic BB / 100 Hands

pocketdooz

What would be a realistic target BB / 100 hands on iPoker at 50 and 100 NL

I'm currently running good and have a pretty decent one but . . .

long-term over say 25,000 hands - what would you expect / aim for if you were a winning player ?

Thanks

pierce hard

pocketdooz wrote: »

long-term over say 1,000,000 hands

i reckon 5-6 would be pretty good, could be wrong tho.

pocketdooz

pierce hard wrote: »

i reckon 5-6 would be pretty good, could be wrong tho.

So, multitabling 4 tables at 100 NL, you would then be looking at making around $12 per hour average over the long-term, is that about right ? (not including rakeback etc. )

Not used to calculating BB / so want to make sure I understand it right.

Thanks

thedini

pocketdooz wrote: »

So, multitabling 4 tables at 100 NL, you would then be looking at making around $12 per hour average over the long-term, is that about right ? (not including rakeback etc. )

Not used to calculating BB / so want to make sure I understand it right.

Thanks

6BB X $1 X 4 = 24

TommyGunne

All of them

pocketdooz

what would you expect / aim for if you were a winning player ?

TommyGunne wrote: »

All of them

Good answer, glad I posted.

cooker3

Well it depends if you mean bb/100 or pt bb/100 which is double. A pt/bb 100 of over 5 is very good

pocketdooz

cooker3 wrote: »

Well it depends if you mean bb/100 or pt bb/100 which is double. A pt/bb 100 of over 5 is very good

thanks, any chance you could explain these two and the difference ?

PT3 shows BB / 100 hands

thedini

pocketdooz wrote: »

thanks, any chance you could explain these two and the difference ?

PT3 shows BB / 100 hands

a BB is what it says on the tin. a ptbb is 2bbs

cooker3

pocketdooz wrote: »

thanks, any chance you could explain these two and the difference ?

PT3 shows BB / 100 hands

Simply put, if you have bb/100 of 5 then at .50/1.00 you earn $5 per 100 hands. If you have a pt bb/100 of 5 then at .50/1.00 you earn $10 per 100 hands. So a pt bb/100 is double bb/100.

pocketdooz

Thanks

I assume a pt bb / 100 is just the pokertracker bb / 100 shown in the stats ?

SuperHans

Yes, it actually stands for big bet, not big blind. The big bet is a term used in limit hold'em to refer to the size of the bet made on the turn and river.

pocketdooz

SuperHans wrote: »

Yes, it actually stands for big bet, not big blind. The big bet is a term used in limit hold'em to refer to the size of the bet made on the turn and river.

Good man, makes sense now.

Any thoughts from anyone on what a long-term decent pt bb / 100 should be so ?

cooker3

pocketdooz wrote: »

Good man, makes sense now.

Any thoughts from anyone on what a long-term decent pt bb / 100 should be so ?

Long term, If your getting over 4 then your doing well

pok3rplaya

pretty sure I could do >10ptBB/100.

zuutroy

pok3rplaya wrote: »

pretty sure I could do >10ptBB/100.

Steaks?

pok3rplaya

50NL, maybe not on iPoker though I'm not sure.

TommyGunne

I did 9.5ptBB/100 over >50k hands at 50NL, so anyone decent definitely could do >10. That was a year ago as well where I sucked slightly less than I do now.

Hitman Actual

pok3rplaya wrote: »

50NL, maybe not on iPoker though I'm not sure.

Out of curiousity, what do you expect to make at 400NL and 600NL? I know you beat those limits, anyway.

Edit to add: What's wrong with iPoker these days? I thought it was the place to be a few months ago?

pocketdooz

pok3rplaya wrote: »

50NL, maybe not on iPoker though I'm not sure.

Why not iPoker ?

Headspace

Just moved up to 2/4, I would be interested to hear a a realistic target for a good plr. I best 1/2 for 15BB/100 over a small sample size, I found the plrs very exploitable but 2/4 is alot tougher what u beating mid steaks 4 pokerplr, Or i would like to hear the highest BB/100 on this forum 4 mid steaks!!

pocketdooz

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposter
Look at the maths of it:

If you can make 2 ptBB/100 at a level (that's 4BB's) - 2500 hands is 1 buy-in - so 50k hands is 20 buy-ins - let's assume your br is 20 buy-ins

So assume each level jump takes 50k hands.

50NL -> 100NL -> 200NL -> 400NL -> 600NL (I said assume) -> 1kNL -> 2kNL and we've only played 300k hands.

Yes of course you may run good or bad but if you put the work in (that includes extra study etc.) and you have the ability then it shouldn't take that long.


1) Is this math correct ?

2) Is this really realistic ?

3 ) Has anyone on here run like this ?

Thanks

pok3rplaya

lenny_leonard wrote: »

Out of curiousity, what do you expect to make at 400NL and 600NL? I know you beat those limits, anyway.

Edit to add: What's wrong with iPoker these days? I thought it was the place to be a few months ago?

3 probably. If I could make 5 I'd be over the moon.

pok3rplaya

pocketdooz wrote: »

Why not iPoker ?

Dunno I heard it's not that soft at the midstakes so maybe it's not as easy to beat as the 50NL I've most recently played.

pok3rplaya

pocketdooz wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imposter
Look at the maths of it:

If you can make 2 ptBB/100 at a level (that's 4BB's) - 2500 hands is 1 buy-in - so 50k hands is 20 buy-ins - let's assume your br is 20 buy-ins

So assume each level jump takes 50k hands.

50NL -> 100NL -> 200NL -> 400NL -> 600NL (I said assume) -> 1kNL -> 2kNL and we've only played 300k hands.

Yes of course you may run good or bad but if you put the work in (that includes extra study etc.) and you have the ability then it shouldn't take that long.


1) Is this math correct ?

2) Is this really realistic ?

3 ) Has anyone on here run like this ?

Thanks

It never really works out like this.

phantom_lord

it did for sauce!

phantom_lord

one thing no one mentioned which makes a big difference is how many tables u play

pok3rplaya

phantom_lord wrote: »

it did for sauce!

sauce can go and ask my bo$%ix

pocketdooz

4 Tabling at the moment - 50 NL, iPoker

pok3rplaya

no chance, you're screwed

pocketdooz

lol, why's that ?

pok3rplaya

lol jk. Just thought it was funny like you expectd us to tell you if you were going to make it or not.

pocketdooz

phantom_lord . . . ." one thing no one mentioned which makes a big difference is how many tables u play"

This was the question asked by Phantom Lord.

So I answered it.

I'm not looking for you to tell me if I'm going to "make it".

I was wondering what a decent long-term ptBB / 100 would be at this level.

Answers vary from 4 to 10 so far

pok3rplaya

His question was clearly rethorical so.. lol

pocketdooz

pok3rplaya wrote: »

His question was clearly rethorical so.. lol

Brilliant

Back on topic ?

pok3rplaya

10

/end thread

pocketdooz

pok3rplaya wrote: »

10

/end thread

Obviously a new mod imo

pok3rplaya

you're welcome. If you have any more questions just let me know.

TommyGunne

Well in all fairness he's kinda right. You'd wanna be beating 50NL 4tabling for 7+ ptBB/100 imo if you are to move on easily. 50NL to 100NL is a pretty huge jump in terms of standard.

Wait you play FR? I wouldn't have a clue what wr you need there to be good but I assume its less. Just play 6max pls. You'll learn faster and make money faster.

Macspower

As PL said the number of tables you play has a big effect on the bb/100 for most players...

Just looking at mine It's at about 3bb/100 over a very large sample from 100nl - 600nl but mainly 200nl.. I now when i played 16 tabes for a month I ran at under 1bb/100 and ran as high as 10bb/100 playing 4 tables... at my normal 9 tables I seem to run at about 3.5/100 which for me is the best balance when you take bonus/rakeback into account..

I reckon a multitabler with any +ev bb/100 can make a healthy profit when you include rakeback

pocketdooz

Macspower wrote: »

As PL said the number of tables you play has a big effect on the bb/100 for most players...

Just looking at mine It's at about 3bb/100 over a very large sample from 100nl - 600nl but mainly 200nl.. I now when i played 16 tabes for a month I ran at under 1bb/100 and ran as high as 10bb/100 playing 4 tables... at my normal 9 tables I seem to run at about 3.5/100 which for me is the best balance when you take bonus/rakeback into account..

I reckon a multitabler with any +ev bb/100 can make a healthy profit when you include rakeback

Good answer as usual, thanks

Chucky the tree

For FR at NL50 5 BB/100(pt/bb) would be considered good. Really though, hourly rate is alot more benefical.

mdwexford

TommyGunne wrote: »

Well in all fairness he's kinda right. You'd wanna be beating 50NL 4tabling for 7+ ptBB/100 imo if you are to move on easily. 50NL to 100NL is a pretty huge jump in terms of standard.

Ya think so??

100nl is a bit more aggro preflop but it doesnt take to long to adjust to that and there are still plenty of tards about and the rest are mainly 16/12 type guys, there arent many good lags about who cause real problems imo. I think the increase in standard is reasonable enough that if you beat 50nl for an ok winrate you will be a winner at 100nl pretty quickly.

cooker3

I seriously doubt the gap between 50nl and 100nl is that big. If you table select well I could see someone beating 50nl for 3 pt bb/100 to beat 100nl

[nicK]

pok3rplaya wrote: »

pretty sure I could do >10ptBB/100.

bs..

zuutroy

[nicK] wrote: »

bs..

at 50nl? I think its achievable...

DaSilva

Like anywhere from 4bb/100 is good and sustainable. There is always tons of people who reckon it's piss easy too make over 10ptbb/100 at the micros, but those are usually the same people who don't play the micros. I think they would all be surprised at how many regs there are at every level these days. They will show you a graph of 8k hands where they are like 16ptbb/100 and just assume it's sustainable.

I play NL25 and am around 6bb/100, and this is mainly to do with the fact that I table and seat select religiously, I do consider myself better than most of the regs at my level who are generally either weak tight, or spewFPSmachines who take 3betting light to an all new level where they 3bet you every single open. I don't bother trying to beat the regs, and people are always telling me that's a bad idea because I will eventually have to play more often with them at the high stakes, but I will cross that bridge when it comes, because I think it's more +EV to grow my BR faster than know how too beat the weaker of the regs and move up in stakes at a lower speed.

TommyGunne

DaSilva wrote: »

Like anywhere from 4bb/100 is good and sustainable. There is always tons of people who reckon it's piss easy too make over 10ptbb/100 at the micros, but those are usually the same people who don't play the micros. I think they would all be surprised at how many regs there are at every level these days. They will show you a graph of 8k hands where they are like 16ptbb/100 and just assume it's sustainable.

I play NL25 and am around 6bb/100, and this is mainly to do with the fact that I table and seat select religiously, I do consider myself better than most of the regs at my level who are generally either weak tight, or spewFPSmachines who take 3betting light to an all new level where they 3bet you every single open. I don't bother trying to beat the regs, and people are always telling me that's a bad idea because I will eventually have to play more often with them at the high stakes, but I will cross that bridge when it comes, because I think it's more +EV to grow my BR faster than know how too beat the weaker of the regs and move up in stakes at a lower speed.

very sensible approach imo.

phantom_lord

zuutroy wrote: »

at 50nl? I think its achievable...

isn't the rake something crazy like 12bb/100 at 50nl?

zuutroy

phantom_lord wrote: »

isn't the rake something crazy like 12bb/100 at 50nl?

dug up an old ipoker DB and its 4.73ptbb/100

HiCloy

phantom_lord wrote: »

isn't the rake something crazy like 12bb/100 at 50nl?

Looks like around 6 PTBB, the individual site #s mightn't be the best as small enough samples but the sites are all pretty close to 6

http://www.marketrake.com/0.50%20NLHE%20SH.htm