Omaha8 Hourly Rate Confidence Levels

[iMsoLucky0]

Hello, I am a solid o8 shorthanded player. However, I can not beat full tables. I do very well at these tables, and have recently began to keep statistics of my play. I play 10 20 on party, and like I said I only play shorthanded tables. After 20 hours of keeping statistics (and many more profitable hours without keeping track) I am making just over 150 an hour.

My question is this: How many hours is generally accepted as the minimum to have statistical accuracy?

Also, I am sure that this answer will be different for omaha 8 than it would be for holdem as the atmospheres of the tables and games are completely different.

Any input would be greatly appreciated though.

[beset7]

If you have Statking I suggest you read the how-to file on confidence rate and standard deviation. I believe Malmuth says that you can generally trust the confidence rate after as little as 100 hours of play. I personally would want about 3x that before I'd start taking it seriously. O8 does tend to have less variance so maybe 150 hours would be enough of a sample to give some weight to your confidence rate, standard deviation and hourly rate.

[iMsoLucky0]

I do have statking, and I just looked at the help files, but I couldn't find anywhere where it says how many hours you need. I know that it says how confident your results are and everything, but do you know if it gives a number of hours required anywhere?

Also Does anyone else play 10 20 (or any other limit) hilo on party? I was curious as to what others earn as far as BBs per hour or 100 hands or whatever.

[Moneyline]

If you're only playing 1 table, your results will not be sustainable over the long run. You don't have anywhere near a large enough sample size, and the fact that you can't beat full tables sheds some doubt on your ability. Not trying to be rude here, but no one is good enough to average 7.5 BB an hour. Now, if you're playing 6 tables at a time, an expert could make this (assuming he/she could find 6 shorthanded 10/20 08 tables), but I suspect that you are not 6 tabling.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
If you're only playing 1 table, your results will not be sustainable over the long run. You don't have anywhere near a large enough sample size, and the fact that you can't beat full tables sheds some doubt on your ability. Not trying to be rude here, but no one is good enough to average 7.5 BB an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey Moneyline, I don't mean to be rude either, but you didn't answer the question. The poster was inquiring about confidence level, which goes directly the sustainability or unsustainability of an hourly rate. Just to go "Small Sample Size!" and "Unsustainable!" doesn't really help. How many hours of table time does a person need before the standard deviation has had it's day and the hourly rate is probably close to accurate? That was the question.

[iMsoLucky0]

I never proposed that my current rate was sustainable. But no, I am not playing just 1 table at a time. I usually play 1-3 (depending on the availability), but usually it is 2 tables at once.

And on the fact that noone can average 7.5 BB an hour, you are flat wrong. When playing 2 tables of 2-6 players each, you are seeing around 180-200 hands an hour. And as poorly as some people play, and from talking to other successful players at these limits, there is no doubt in my mind that this level is sustainable (however I do not know what my accurate rate is going to be).

And as for questioning my skill level? I don't understand what your reasoning was for this at all. Believe me, I am a winning o8 player on shorthanded players. I guess I phrased it wrong by saying that I "can't beat full tables" but the truth is that I learned the game shorthanded, and if you don't understand how different the game is 5 handed compared to 10 handed, then your poker skill is obviously lacking. I have not taken the time to learn the game full handed as it is rather boring from what I have learned. Short handed play is a game that values playing the player much more than full handed. And headsup is a completely different animal altogether. If you don't believe that someone can be a winning shorthanded (or headsup) player and a losing full table player, then we can play shorthanded whenever you like. Just try me.

But alas, as beset so kindly points out, your post was irrelevant and pointless (as this one ended up being). I was simply asking how many hours is required to achieve an accurate picture of win rate per hour.

Please go post your drivel somewhere else.

[Moneyline]

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough, I was referring to 7.5 BB per 1 table as being unsustainable. Congratulations on being able to make that much 2 tabling. You must be a really fantastic player.

I made the comments that I did because most players, even winning players, are not fantastic players. I also assumed that someone good enough to figure out how to beat 2 simultaneous 6 handed (or thereabouts) games for 3.75 BB/hour a piece (which is very large) would be able to figure out how to beat a ring game too. I readily admit that you may be an exception. In my poker experience, which is fairly extensive, I’ve also run into many dozens (perhaps more) of players who have overvalued their skill-level based on short-term results. These players could use a friendly dose of reality. Judging by the short-term info you included in your post I figured you were one of those players, but I also admit that my judgment on this could very well be wrong.

The point of my original answer was that you need A LOT more than 20 hours of stats to approach statistical accuracy... but after you last response I'm sure you already know this.

Sorry I bothered you so much. Good luck at the tables.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]

Please go post your drivel somewhere else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now now. I like Moneyline's posts and being apart of his process and hearing his opinions is something I look foward to. The sample size is too small, but how big it needs to be I'm not 100% sure. I can't remember if it was in Gambling Theory or in the help files for Statking but I believe Malmuth says you can trust a confidence level after 100 hours. Perhaps your win rate is sustainable in short-handed games using good table selection. Keep us posted!

[mosquito]

The answer depends on the confidence level you
want. I don't recall exactly, but the 100 hour
level is something like 95% confidence. To get
to 99% confidence is SIGNIFICANTLY more. (Order
of magnitude? 1000 hrs?)

Also, it has to do with your standard deviation as
well, if memory serves. So you may need more or
less hours based on that.

Anyhow, it's all in Mason's book, please look
for yourself. lots of nice formulae.

BTW, 99% is where the 300 BB bankroll came from.
At 95%, you can go with a much smaller bankroll.

[Nick709]

Hey, I play the Party 10/20 games also, coincidentally I also try to play in the short-handed games, drop me a PM as I would love to talk to you about these games. Include your E-mail.

[BradleyT]

[ QUOTE ]
but no one is good enough to average 7.5 BB an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

Says who?