PL Win Rate

I've been playing in the same Pot-limit game for 6 months now: 45 session and a total of 240 h. My win rate so far is:


$22.5/h


My Standard Deviation is


$91.4/h


The games are mostly Hold'em and Omaha with blinds $.50-$1 and the buy-in is $50 (I usually buy in for 2 to 4 times that amount).


The game is not super soft, but I think I'm the strongest of the regular players. (I also think confidence is an important part of winning poker.)


1) Is a win rate this high realistic for a $50 buy-in game or can I not expect to win this much in the future?


2) What would be a high enough bankroll for this game? (According to Gambling Theory and Other Topics my current bankroll of $4000 would be plenty (if my win rate is accurate), but do the book figures apply to pot-limit?


(The figures have been transformed to USD so non finish readers can get a feel for the size of the game).


/LC, Finland

Dear LC,

In PL winning or losing just a single pot will influence your hourly rate for a very long time. 240 hours is a relatively short period of time and if you have been lucky in just two or three pots more than can usually be expected, your hourly rate will be MUCH higher than the quality of your play warrants. Let's say you were lucky in two just $1200 pots during the period you mentioned; your hourly rate is now $10 higher than it would have been had you lost both these pots. Still, pot-limit poker is a highly skillful poker form and if you're simply a lot better than your opponents, you can expect to win a lot (that is, if they don't go broke). In big pot-limit games hourly rates of $60 and more are common; under the game conditions you describe, assuming you are in fact the best player, an hourly rate of $15 would seem possible to me. Still, keep in mind the fluctuating nature of pot-limit poker. I have seen winning players lose a bundle of money, even over a long period of time, and 'suckers' win huge over a period of 80 hours or more. (This would be more likely in PLO than in PLH, of course).


Regarding your second question: if you regularly buy-in for $200 in the game you mention, you can expect to go broke, period. You've got only 20 buy-ins available to you and even the best players can go through a downswing of 20 buy-ins. For the game you mention I would recommend having $10,000 available for play; remember, this is NOT limit poker where the fluctuations are much smaller. Good luck to you,

Rolf.

Actually, I have found the fluctuations in pot limit much smaller and manageable than an equivalent size limit game (pot limit HE 5/10 blinds - limit HE 20/40- 30/60). Something about there usually being fewer players in each pot (less drawouts), making reads and good laydowns being much easier as the "signals" the players send out are much more distinct (if a certain player raises the pot on the flop you "know" he has you well beat and you can fold; compare that to trying to interpret all the raising that goes on in limit games), the live ones being much easier to punish and take ALL their money, it is much easier to control the game and use your position to take down many pots without showing cards (in limit someone will nearly always take one of on the flop). True, if you lose a couple of major confrontations it can dent your bankroll, but as long as the game is good you can expect the "loan" to return in a short time from one of the bad players. Doyle Brunson says that he once won 56 sessions of no limit holdem in a row. Try doing that in limit holdem.

the fact that you usually buy 100 to 200 in a game with only $1 big blind suggests that it is a very active game, and thus perhaps your win rate is OK


truth is that it is very hard for anyone to know how big a game is by the size of the buy-in or blinds...in pot limit the amount of action will determine that.


not long ago I was playing in three seperate pot limit games at different places and on different days. at all three, several players were same guys but others were different folks in different places. all three were 5-5-10 with either 200 or 300 buy-in BUT one was oh so much bigger while one was rather tight and thus smaller.


in all of these games first player to act after the deal could call the 10 and raise 50, thereafter betting was limited to size of pot rounded up to nexr 25. idea behind 3 blinds and first raise is to make it expensive for a player to just sit and wait for AA, etc.