What do they mean when they say "crush" the game?

Reading this web site and SSHE, I often hear the phrase, "you should be able to crush these small stakes games". What is the definition of crush? I read alot in here that if you are winning 2 bb/100 hands, you are doing very well. To me this would not seem like "crushing" the game. I guess what I'm really looking for is what is about the highest sustainable win rate for very good players at the 1/2 or 2/4 level.

Go to the micro limits forum and read the FAQ. There's a link to Ed Miller's post about crushing the game and other information. You could also do a search or look for the micro limits stats thread. My understanding is in 1/2 or 2/4 full ring a sustainable rate over several tens of thousands of hands is 3BB/100 hands. In some of the lower micros and at the party beginner tables (based on what I've read about party) you could easily see a higher rate.

Edit: you could also check out the Small stakes forum FAQ and stats thread since I think 2/4 to 10/20 is considered small stakes.

Thanks for the help. Good stuff.

Here is my poker story thus far. It might seem long-winded but I'll use it to illustrate my point and I'll address your concern at the end.

SSHE is an excellent book. Using mostly only it and HFAP and TOP I have finished ahead while moving up from 2/4 to 4/8 to 8/16 live. I was an absolute beginner at the start.

2/4 94 hours +$116. My postflop play was not great, but even so, the rake is MURDEROUS at 2/4, they are taking at least 3/4 BB out of EVERY pot.

4/8 200 hours +$1182. My postflop play has improved but is still not stellar. Net win slightly less than 3/4 BB per hour. The rake is still a significant factor as they are taking out almost 1/2 BB per pot.

8/16 120 hours +$1317. Postflop steadily improving, ability to read hands improved, don't feel "lost" in a hand very much anymore. Win rate is less than 3/4 BB per hour.

Experienced players will tell you that 414 hours is a small sample and they are basically right. However, consider this; during this time the 9 other players in my game have paid the house $40,000+ and paid me $2,600+ to play poker. This is NOT a testament to how great a player I am. It is mostly a function of how poorly the others play, how subtly crushing the rake is and the excellent value of 2+2 instructional works.

On page 341 of SSHE claims are made about possible online earnings and moving up to limits as high as 30/60. I believe these are accurate and reasonable. I routinely sweat the 30/60 games live while waiting for my seat and think that I could already hold my own in many of them.

HOWEVER ...

The claim to be able to "crush" small stakes is out of line. It is a VERY rare intance of senseless hype in a 2+2 work. The Greg Raymer plug on the back of their books is silly also. Yes, I understand, this is how books are sold.

2+2 products are heads and shoulders above the rest, it's not even close. But fish don't need bicycles and 2+2 doesn't need hype. Period.

So (figuratively speaking) I am raising the ridiculous donkbet from the only player in the game that I respect hoping that he'll get back in line for the benefit of all.

4-5BB at .5/1
2-3BB at 1/2+

i dont know enough about limits higher than 3/6.