Expected income

[LazyLightning]

[For those of you who read this in 'General Theory' I apologize for posting it in the wrong forlder]

In the past few months, I established a goal of playing holdem to generate an alternative revenue stream. To this end, I documented a curriculum to attain my goal including reading seminal holdem texts, visiting discussion groups, and of course, playing regularly.

On councel, I am focusing on 'beating' a 5-10 game for a year before moving on to a 10-20 game.

I played twice in the past two weeks. Each time, I bring a bankroll of $250, cash-in for $200, and set my parameters at four hours or $200 profit.

Week one: I played three hands (AA, QQ, KK), winning with AA and KK while walking away with $175 in four hours.
Week two: I played two hands (K2suited and 99, not including folding AQ os)and walked away with $150.
(honing a tight/aggresive style)

It was during this session that the precept of one big bet per hour came to mind. After two and a half hours, I was down almost $100. With only $20 in misplaced bets, I attributed my depleted bank roll to the house's rake.

Is one big bet per hour the rule?

In The Psycology of Poker, Dr. Schoonmaker advocates that game selection significantly contributes to one's winnings. If so, could one argue that selective players with bankroll and time guidelines can earn more than one big bet per hour?

Many people believe that one can earn a second income from playing. How can you do so if you're earning one big bet per hour (unless other factors, such as game selection, bankroll, and time mangement augment the 1 BB per hour rate)?

The feedback of professionals and those who make a second income from poker is sincerely appreciated.

LazyLightning
"The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet."
-Grantland Rice

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Week one: I played three hands (AA, QQ, KK), winning with AA and KK while walking away with $175 in four hours.
Week two: I played two hands (K2suited and 99, not including folding AQ os)and walked away with $150.
(honing a tight/aggresive style)

[/ QUOTE ]

Are these the only hands you voluntarily put money in with preflop? Or do you mean these are the only hands you put money in with postflop? Did you play anything from the blinds? This seems way too tight (but then again, you played K2 suited, so how tight can it be?)

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
With only $20 in misplaced bets, I attributed my depleted bank roll to the house's rake.


[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you get the $20 figure from? In any case, your depleted bankroll came from not winning enough hands to offset your blinds. In a 10-handed game getting 30 hands/hr, you are putting in at least $21/hr in blinds (assuming $2/$5 blinds). If you only get 3 playable hands in 4 hours, it's going to be difficult to win the $82 required to offset your blinds. This doesn't take into account the times where you complete your small blind (another $3 each) or the times where you catch part of the flop and continue on, or the times where you lose with AA, KK, QQ, etc.

As far as the "one big bet per hour" figure, at the low or mid limits it's possible to win more (up to 2 BB/hr), although game selection becomes more important. It's also easier to get to the 2 BB/hr mark if you are only playing at "better" times.

[LazyLightning]

Are these the only hands you voluntarily put money in with preflop? Or do you mean these are the only hands you put money in with postflop? Did you play anything from the blinds? This seems way too tight (but then again, you played K2 suited, so how tight can it be?)
----------------------
These were the only hands I played post-flop.
Certainly, tight play. That's why I stayed in with K2 suited in late position with weak limpers behind me (no fear of raise). Mixing up my play luckily resulted in floping two pair only to have a K on the river fill me up and give my opponent a flush.

Where do you get the $20 figure from?
------------------------
I completed my small blind for $3 dollars twice on weak hands. I raised in middle position with AQ off suit ($5). I ssaw the flop with another weak hand for $5. Rounded off the number to $20.


I appreciate your response.

[Tommy Angelo]

"I played [$5-10] twice in the past two weeks. Each time, I bring a bankroll of $250 ..."

Your expected income: goes to expenses (the house).

"... and set my parameters at four hours or $200 profit."

Your expected outcome: confusion, disappointment, and various psychological disorders.

Tommy

[SoBeDude]

I'm really glad you expanded on your first post. I'm still having a hard time though.

I was thinking you only saw the flop with 3 hands all night. Even now, I don't see how you can make $175 winning 2 out of 3 hands you took to the river, with the size of the rake blinds in a 15-30 game.

Was it an incredibly wild-loose game with lots of capping?

Seems you would have spent $300 in blinds (one 15 and one 10 blind, 3 times an hour for 4 hours), plus I'm guessing you spent about $75 with the QQs you lost with, meaning you needed to make a profit of $550 in two hands. Even if you're only putting in 1/4th of the pot on your winning hands, which I doubt (thats 3 callers to the showdown), you had to take down a total of $690 in 2 hands (550 in profit plus your 140 in bets). That comes out to an average pot size of over 11 big bets...

These numbers don't seem believable, am I missing something?

-Scott

[SittingBull]

logged in at the 5/10 level at a B&amp;M?? Online??
Happy pokering,
Sitting Bull /forums/images/icons/laugh.gif

[pudley4]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I don't see how you can make $175 winning 2 out of 3 hands you took to the river, with the size of the rake blinds in a 15-30 game

[/ QUOTE ]

It isn't very clear, but he's saying he left with $175 (so a net loss of $25)

He's also playing 5-10, not 15-30

[SoBeDude]

ah perhaps you're right. I read it to mean he WON $175.

my bad on the 15-30 vs 5-10.

-Scott

[-Heineken-]

"I played twice in the past two weeks. Each time, I bring a bankroll of $250, cash-in for $200, and set my parameters at four hours or $200 profit."

There is no valid reason for setting a limit on profit. Why leave if you're up $200?!? You probably have a good table image at this point. Also, why leave a really good game after 4 hours? If you have the best of the competition, it would be silly to leave because your"time is up" or because you snagged a $200 win. If you have the best of it, you should keep playing,period. I would recommend reading Inside the Poker Mind by John Feeney. It explains why you should not set limits like that on your game. The book is well worth the price.
Also, $250 might be a little light for a 5-10 game. I buy in to 3-6 with 200 (and make sure to have another hundred or two just in case. I wouldnt want to be in a good game and have to leave because of a brief downswing depleting my short stack. It might be better to bring a bigger bankroll or play a smaller game.
If you play only 4 hours once a week or so, that is only 208 hours a year. Barely a big enough sample to judge your results on.
I am also puzzled as to why you would bring $250 to lose but will leave if you're up $200. That just doesn't make sense to me. Especially at 5-10. I play only 3-6 and I've won $300+ on a few occasions and lost just as much on others. The swings at 5-10 are even greater. The point is $200 is not a tremendous win at 5-10 so you should not limit yourself to that. You have to think of all your games as one really long sesion, and not be so concerened with each individual session.