Poker Stars $10NL vs $25 NL

[aces_full]

Not sure if I have enough hands,but I am finding this a little odd with my Poker Tracker stats. I started playing micro-NL at .01/.02 last year at Poker Stars. I quickly moved up to .05/.10, and that's when I started using Poker Tracker. After I made nearly $200 there I moved up to .10/.25NL.

At .05/.10 NL I have 5600 hands and I'm beating the game for 15.36BB/100. At the .10/.25 I have 8000 hands and I am making a mere 7.56BB/100. I moved up to a game that is 2.5X my old stakes, but when these numbers translate to $/hr, I'm making a mere .51/hr more at .10/.25 than I was at .05/.10. It doesn't seem like the competetion at .10/.25 is all that much better than .05/.10, but I'm a little disappointed to only be making a lousy fifty cents more per hour. If this trend continues, I will make less at .25/.50 than I do at .10/.25.

What is considered to be a "good" win rate for no limit? Maybe I just had some exceptional luck at .05/.10. Is it normal for win rates (in terms of BB/100) to drop as one moves up. Is there really enough skill difference between levels at these stakes to account for it? Or is it just possible that I really don't have enough hands at either level to make meaningful conclusions from the data?

[greg nice]

5600 and 8000 hands are nothing.

you havent played long at all

[Siawyn]

first off, that's an extremely small sample size. you need about 100k hands to have a solid sample.

secondly, your win rate of 15.36BB/100 at .05/.10 is extremely good. There's a little twist in that Poker Tracker still considers a "big bet" twice the big blind for NL. So you are actually winning almost 31 big blinds per 100 hands at .05/.10, or about $3.10 per 100 hands. Your win rate at .10/.25 is still good. you're making about 15 big blinds per 100, or about 15*.25=$3.75 per 100 hands. I would think your win rate would drop slightly as you continue to move up levels, but of course since the stakes increase it should more than counter it.. assuming you're a solid player of course. You're still increasing your profitability and that's the bottom line.

My first paragraph still stands there, you have nowhere near a credible sample size...ESPECIALLY in no limit when if you won just 1 or 2 huge pots and avoided the reverse, it's going to be majorly skewed with so few hands.

[BobboFitos]

The other posters are right, too small a sample size.

It's very possible to beat the micro limits for a huge BB/100. My BB/100 at PS .1 is 92BB/100! (...Over 141 hands....)