best win rate while single-tabling 5/10

[Wynton]

I've been playing 5/10 at party for less than a month now, single-tabling. It appears that I'm running quite lucky. But I'm curious how much of it has to do with the fact that I'm playing one table at a time exclusively.

How many bb per 100 hands do you think a good or even excellent player (not me, of course) can achieve at party 5/10, playing only one table at a time?

[ALL1N]

5

Playing one table is pretty dumb, man.

[Wynton]

I just moved up to 5/10, so I don't think it's dumb for me.

But I'm surprised at your answer. Over an insignificant sample - under 5,000 hands - my rate is something like 4.5, which I assumed was unsustainable, even while playing one table. If that rate is sustainable, though, I might really consider sticking to one table, which I actually enjoy more anyone. Besides, I suspect I'm one of those people whose win rate drops dramaticaly while multi-tabling.

[TheCaptain]

[ QUOTE ]
How many bb per 100 hands do you think a good or even excellent player (not me, of course) can achieve at party 5/10, playing only one table at a time?

[/ QUOTE ]

upper theoretical limit is actually 8.442 BB / 100
in practice the limit is about 6.2 BB / 100

[LSUfan1]

If you feel that your game would drop enough that it would not be +EV, there is nothing wrong with sticking to one table.

I love to 6 table the full ring games, but if I get over 3 tables short handed my decisions start to fall off.

My advice to you, do what you know! And the 4.5 is sustainable with the right table selection.

[gildwulf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many bb per 100 hands do you think a good or even excellent player (not me, of course) can achieve at party 5/10, playing only one table at a time?

[/ QUOTE ]

upper theoretical limit is actually 8.442 BB / 100
in practice the limit is about 6.2 BB / 100

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you get these numbers and how?

[helpmeout]

you can easily run at 5bb+ over 20k or 30k hands if not more

just keep trying to improve and dont worry about winrates

as long as you are 2bb+ then you are going ok

[xCEO]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many bb per 100 hands do you think a good or even excellent player (not me, of course) can achieve at party 5/10, playing only one table at a time?

[/ QUOTE ]

upper theoretical limit is actually 8.442 BB / 100
in practice the limit is about 6.2 BB / 100

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did you get these numbers and how?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong, it is 8.443bb/100

[TheCaptain]

[ QUOTE ]


You are wrong, it is 8.443bb/100

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry. The OP has a 5k sample size, so I only quoted it to 3 significant digits.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
How many bb per 100 hands do you think a good or even excellent player (not me, of course) can achieve at party 5/10, playing only one table at a time?

[/ QUOTE ]

upper theoretical limit is actually 8.442 BB / 100
in practice the limit is about 6.2 BB / 100

[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't tell if this is a sarcastic post or not. If it's not sarcsastic, then perhaps you could elaborate.

In any event, just in case it's not obvious to everyone, I'm merely asking for ballpark guesses based on personal experiences, rather than hard numbers.

Any other views?

[setjes]

[ QUOTE ]
You are wrong, it is 8.443bb/100

[/ QUOTE ]

smartass /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Roy6]

I think really paying attention to the game, I mean reviewing each winning/mucked hand after showdown (which got easier with PokerAce btw) + constantly taking notes is an awful lot of time. It's OK with 1 table but I hardly manage it with 2. Or maybe I'm the only one who's that slow on the uptake? /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[MicroBob]

I keep messing around with 1 and 2 tabling as well.
Particularly in 3 and 4-handed situations.

This is how I was working my way into 10/20 (I don't play a single limit exclusively...more based on time of day and week, as well as my mood).

My win-rate is pretty darned fantastic when 1 and 2-tabling and REALLY takes a nose-dive when I get to 3 and 4 tables.

I can handle making the typical auto-pilot moves for the most part...but any specific reads I might have start to go out the window and I'm pretty much just a sucky player.

It sucks...because I really want to crank out the hands.
But I'm with you on sometimes enjoying REALLY working on just 1 or 2 players and staying that deeply focused into the game.

Of course...if I stopped typing all these silly posts while playing maybe that would help too.
great idea!! okay...i'm done posting now.

good luck.

[maxpowers21]

After rake if you can maintain 2BB/100 at 5-10 short while multi-tabling you are a very good/excellent player. Of course, the single most important factor at maximizing your winrate at these levels either 5-10 or 10-20 is excellent table selection. That and not sucking.

[wackjob]

My first 50K or so hands at Party 5/10 6-max I ran just about 2BB/100 after rake. I hadn't been using PT before that so I don't know how I did previously(probably worse). I play 2-4 tables, and many times that is a wacked out mix: 2 10/20's and 2 5/10's or 2 5/10's and 2 5/10's of O8.

I imagine if I was really concentrated and focused on a single table I could easily up that to 3-4BB/100, but I can't do it. The game is too slow only 1 table at a time and I'd likely get distracted and start losing.

[Jeff W]

[ QUOTE ]
Over an insignificant sample - under 5,000 hands - my rate is something like 4.5, which I assumed was unsustainable, even while playing one table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd guess that BB/100>4.5 is possible 1-tabling 5/10 6-max.

[Wynton]

Things sure do change fast. Almost immediately after I started this thread, I went on a spiral downward. Still single-tabling 90% of the time, I am now losing at 5/10.

I prefer to believe that my initial good run was unsustainable by anyone. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif