ssh bb per hour

[peter t 9]

hi guys, how many bb per hour can a player expect to make after reading ssh? i am up about 100 big bets the last two weeks, averaging 4.35 bbs per hour. can i expect this to continue? i play party .5-1,

[David Sklansky]

Four big bets an hour on a single table, even online, is unsustainable.

[mikimaus]

I have played in the past some 500 hours of full ring limit holdem 0.5-1 lowest limit at Paradise, Parties and some other places. At Paradise I won close to four big bets per hour (I only played one table) for 200 hours, then lost half of the winnings back during 100 hours (I suspect Paradise stacked against me as it looked so obvious). At Parties I played their extremely loose 0.5-1 full ring games for just 50 hours (plus some omaha-8 with same results, and I am an educated player, but I just did not either got hands preflop or I did not hit or I did not get there or I lost, but mostly I just did not make hands, so lost solidly of course); I lost solidly four or five big bets per hour (one table comparable; I played two tables), some $200. I think I was being cheated at Parties too though I know they have bigger fluctuations there, while I was playing my bonus but I never got a bonus from the many tries at Parties but just got my winnings and lost solidly the bonus amount during the bonus play. I have every time got a bonus at every other place (bit luck of course). The average of all these hours was a win of about one big bet per hour. One needs at least 1000 hours to draw any opinions about the average win amount of loose limit holdem full ring games, and in case one is being cheated additionally it becomes impossible.

[TimM]

Why on earth would you think the poker sites would risk their reputation and millions of dollars in rake income just to take a few hundred dollars from you and give it to someone else?

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
and I am an educated player

[/ QUOTE ]


LOL

[kpux]

[ QUOTE ]
Four big bets an hour on a single table, even online, is unsustainable.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is probably playing 4 tables at once. I play four tables at once and average about the same, and I know other players that do as well.

[TimM]

I also thought he meant per table, but I have 4300 hands at .50/1, with a BB/100 of 7.92 (4.78BB/hr/table). It's not worth for me it to prove whether or not that is sustainable, but I just figured the lowest limits on a site would have the most awful players and might just be beatable at a high rate.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
I have 4300 hands at .50/1, with a BB/100 of 7.92 (4.78BB/hr/table).

[/ QUOTE ]

If you were getting 60 hands an hour in, that would be just over 70 hours of play.

This is nothing even close to statistically significant, not by a longshot.

Ironically, SO many people come on these forums and make claims that they're averaging 3,4,5 and sometimes even more BB/hour PER GAME playing limit holdem online. They are all simply fooling themselves (and those dumb enough to believe them). Their claims are simply not sustainable.

How about some more reasonable results, mine from 2000-2001:

I played 1200 hours of 3-6 over the course of two years, with an average of perhaps 35-40 hands per hour, we'll say 35. That's 42,000 hands. The players were absolutely terrible most of the time, and I averaged 1.2 big bets per hour. I played about 700 hours in that time frame of 4-8 as well, that's another 24,500 hands, and averaged 1.1 big bets per hour. I also beat 8-16 for about a big bet an hour, but had less than 50 hours those years. These were all full kill games with a $3 drop on the flop and no jackpot drop.

Notice the rake was higher than online, and I do tip $1 a pot for decent pots, rarely more, but there's something critical here that I want you, and everyone who reads this post, to see.

My results are HONEST and BELIEVEABLE.

Now I don't mean to attack you, but I hope you realize that when DS says a 4 bb/hour win rate is unsustainable, IT'S TRUE. Once you have many, many more hands, your results will even out to a more realistic win rate.

al

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
The average of all these hours was a win of about one big bet per hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your honesty here adds to your credibility.

the cheating conspiracies for the 50c-1.00 level don't, you need to drop that line of thinking. Some cheating does occur online, but they usually get caught pretty quick, and usually try to cheat at much higher limits than this.

al

[RED_RAIN]

So in PT...the BB/100 rate if you play 4 tables needs to be divided by 4?

Guess I'm confused on what you guys are stating. Are you stating your rates in PT and timing them by the amount of tables you play to find the rate?

[King Yao]

how about shorthanded games with 200 hands per hour?

[EdSchurr]

No, I'm pretty sure the BB/100 rate is BB/100. Even the BB/hour rate ignores multitabling. But there is a "true win rate" or something that takes into account tables being played at the same time.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
Now I don't mean to attack you, but I hope you realize that when DS says a 4 bb/hour win rate is unsustainable, IT'S TRUE. Once you have many, many more hands, your results will even out to a more realistic win rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I don't know where all of this is coming from, but I do have many more hands and hours. 100000 hands in PT, 1600 hours, and more realistic win rates at all other limits (varying between 0.5 and 2 BB/hr depending on limit and how long ago I played it.)

The hands I quoted were from when I first started, and a couple of different time periods where I chose to cash out most of my account on one site and rebuild. I always had enough to move to 1/2 in such a short time that I never built up many hands at .50/1.

Anyway, it's a moot point for me because it would not be worth it to me to play enough at .50/1 to find out what a sustained win rate could be. I was just speculating that if the players were bad enough, maybe a high win rate could be possible, and the play at .50/1 online seems unbelievably bad.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

This came from my general distaste for those who claim excessively high win rates. I just finally had a post where sklansky said it directly that such rates are impossible.

[ QUOTE ]
100000 hands in PT, 1600 hours, and more realistic win rates at all other limits (varying between 0.5 and 2 BB/hr depending on limit and how long ago I played it.)


[/ QUOTE ]

This is precisely what I am saying IS possible, this is a realistic figure. Congratulations! You are in tune with the universe and yourself....

al

[RED_RAIN]

I believe a good player at .5/1 could beat it for 5 BB/100 over the long run (100k) or above. Easily 4. I quit at 35k or so. Just below 5.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

So you are going to stubbornly cling to the belief...

[ QUOTE ]
I believe a good player at .5/1 could beat it for 5 BB/100 over the long run (100k) or above. Easily 4. I quit at 35k or so. Just below 5.

[/ QUOTE ]

Despite this quote from David Sklansky in this thread...

[ QUOTE ]
Four big bets an hour on a single table, even online, is unsustainable.


[/ QUOTE ]

Here's the post if you haven't read it...

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=923231&page=&view=&sb =5&o=&vc=1

al

[MicroBob]

5BB/100 is around 3BB/hr.

i point this out because it seems that whenever this topic comes up some people confuse BB/hr with BB/100hds.


3BB/hr is still a little high for .5/1....but not by much since 2BB/hr is definitely possible and i think that 2.5BB/hr could be done at the .5/1 level
...especially considering that 1.5BB/hr is realistic for some B&M games even with a higher rake, jackpot-drop, tip and fewer hands per hour.

[Justin A]

Well said.

Justin A

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
So in PT...the BB/100 rate if you play 4 tables needs to be divided by 4?

[/ QUOTE ]

No it just needs to be converted to a BB/hour figure. 60 hand/hour is approx what you should see online at 1 full table. So if you take your BB/100 and multiply it by a factor of 0.6 you should have a reasonable BB/hour/table estimate.

Basically you'd have to be sustaining a winrate of over 7BB/100 to have a 4BB/hour winrate. Most would agree that it cannot be done.

[RED_RAIN]

Thanks. I agree. I was getting confused with BB/100 and BB/HR and then the # of tables.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

2-2.5 bb/hour IS believable online at the 50c-1.00 level.

al

[chson]

[ QUOTE ]
Four big bets an hour on a single table, even online, is unsustainable.

[/ QUOTE ]

It sounds to me like your experience with online poker is quite limited. The average online 10 handed table goes through 60 hands an hour. Combine that fact with the poor play found at these micro-limits and suddenly this hourly rate becomes very feasible.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
It sounds to me like your experience with online poker is quite limited. The average online 10 handed table goes through 60 hands an hour. Combine that fact with the poor play found at these micro-limits and suddenly this hourly rate becomes very feasible.

[/ QUOTE ]

You prove this to me at even 50k hands at .5/1 or above and I'll believe you.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
You prove this to me at even 50k hands at .5/1 or above and I'll believe you.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it were possible, and I never said it was, anyone good enough to make 4BB/hr/table at .50/1 should easily make 1BB/hr/table at 3/6, and it quickly becomes a waste of time to play so low.

By the way, the statement "4BB/hr (or even 40BB/hr) is possible if the players are bad enough" can't be disputed. All you have to do is imagine some really bad players.

For example, a Hold'em game where all 9 opponents always cap every street and never fold would be worth about 1.5BB PER HAND, with a simple strategy of just playing any hand to the river as long as it has a greater than 10% chance against 9 random hands (See http://www.gocee.com/poker/HE_Value.htm ).

The question is, are there any real online games out there with players bad enough to give away collectively 0.07BB per hand to a good player? I don't know for sure one way or the other, and I don't think that just because David Sklansky says so constitutes proof.

[chson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It sounds to me like your experience with online poker is quite limited. The average online 10 handed table goes through 60 hands an hour. Combine that fact with the poor play found at these micro-limits and suddenly this hourly rate becomes very feasible.

[/ QUOTE ]

You prove this to me at even 50k hands at .5/1 or above and I'll believe you.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL @ 50K hands. You should seriously question the source of where you get these soft numbers from. Most likely you learned this number from a B&M poker authority so to put this in a B&M perspective (30 hands/hr), 50K hands is 1666 hours of play per year, 138 hours per month, and 34 hours per week. You're telling me that this poker authority played at this frequency for one entire year to determine his true hourly rate?

[RED_RAIN]

I wasn't talking hypothetically, I was talking realistic. Yes, we think of posibile situations...but never seen this state last for long periods.

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL @ 50K hands. You should seriously question the source of where you get these soft numbers from. Most likely you learned this number from a B&M poker authority so to put this in a B&M perspective (30 hands/hr), 50K hands is 1666 hours of play per year, 138 hours per month, and 34 hours per week. You're telling me that this poker authority played at this frequency for one entire year to determine his true hourly rate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm, no, I never stated anything that you just said being in a B&M. I'm talking about my experience playing online. Your comment has so many errors I don't even with to argue with them.

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn't talking hypothetically, I was talking realistic. Yes, we think of posibile situations...but never seen this state last for long periods.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you have 35k hands of online .50/1, you're probably better qualified to make this statement than anyone else in this thread.

But your own results show a win rate of nearly 3BB/hr/table, a rate some might still say is impossible.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

You've convinced me. I'll stop listening to Sklansky and believe you instead. How could someone like David Sklansky possibly have any ground to disagree with you anyway? It's his lack of experience and knowledge that led him to his error. You've shown us the light, thanks a lot.

al

[CollegePlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
hi guys, how many bb per hour can a player expect to make after reading ssh? i am up about 100 big bets the last two weeks, averaging 4.35 bbs per hour. can i expect this to continue? i play party .5-1,

[/ QUOTE ]
depends on multi-tabling... monthes ago i was playing a combo of eioght $3/6,$2/4 tables and making about $35/hour

[TomCollins]

David, you must not have ever played party .5/1. I bet you could easily make that.

[chson]

[ QUOTE ]
David, you must not have ever played party .5/1. I bet you could easily make that.

[/ QUOTE ]

David, Mason, and Ed (to a lesser extent) have not kept up with the modern world. They constantly make blanket claims gathered from their B&M experience that simply do not apply to online poker.