Max/Average Hourly Expectation from Micro?

[Warik]

I started on Party last week and am very pleased to see some winning in my Hold'em playing for a change. I was wondering what you guys have experienced as far as max hourly winnings in micro $0.50/$1.00.

I played 2 tables for 3 hours tonight and took off with $60. I know this probably can't be expected over the long run, but I'm curious as to what can be expected from a 2+2 beginner and from a seasoned 2+2'er on the micro limits so that I know when it's time to move up.

Thanks!

[daveymck]

I've been playing 9 months but am a 2+2 beginner.

Have now been keeping records properly for the last weeks or so have got 9 hrs in at .50/1 and am running at a rate of just over 3bb an hour.

Having said that that is not a good sample I understand when you have a few thousand hands then you will start to get a full idea on what your real rate is although the standard figure seems to be around 2bb per hour per table.

[MrBlini]

A positive hourly rate over enough hands is what you are after. The Party .50/1 rake is murderous to win rates. Ideally, you should play enough hands that you have have a 95% mathematical certainty of being a winning player at this level, and you should have a bankroll of 300 BB at the next level up ($600). Look elsewhere on this forum for how to compute that (search for standard deviation).

The 300 BB requirement is more important than your win rate estimate. If you fall below 200-250 BB or so at the next level, it is imperative to drop back to your current level.

I don't know of any long-term 5 BB / hour winners. It may be possible for an experienced player who seeks to master .50/1 games to reach that, but certainly not with any leaks.

[Bob T.]

A fairly good player, could probably win over 5 bets an hour in these games. Because of the rake, anything in the plus column, means you are beating the game enough to cover the rake, and leave a little left over for you.

Every inexperienced player is going to be on a different part of the learning curve, so it is hard to say where you should be. Probably somewhere between -2 bets per hour, and +5, depending on how well you play, and how well you select games.

[Bob T.]

The 300 BB requirement is more important than your win rate estimate. If you fall below 200-250 BB or so at the next level, it is imperative to drop back to your current level.

I don't think that this is true. If you aren't a winning player, your bankroll, variance, et al, doesn't mean anything. You are playing microlimit, and if you had to reload, it wouldn't take that much to buy in again. Also, if you're win rate is high enough, you could have a fairly low risk of ruin, with a fairly small bankroll. Remember also, if you can't rebuy, (maybe your wife has all your credit cards or something) you can always go to the mini-micro limits for a while, and play .05/.10 or something, to rebuild your bankroll to a viable .50/1.00 level. I think that at these levels, you really only need 150, or 200 BBs to start taking shots at the next level up. When you move up to higher levels, where the play is tougher, the variance higher, and your win rate in terms of big bets is lower, then maybe 300 BBs is a necessary requirement to move up.

Last month, there was a thread in the SS forum, where people talked about there longest losing streaks, and the big ones were in the range of 150-200. If you have a 200 BB bankroll, and aren't relying on your bankroll for income, you can lose 100 BBs, and then move down a level, and you have a 200BB bankroll again. You might end up moving back two levels, but you should be able to maintain a working bankroll, as long as you don't try and win it all back at once.

If you are relying on your bankroll for income, then you have to have a larger bankroll, and a much smaller Risk of Ruin, and then you might want to consider the 300 BB requirement, or even higher.

[MrBlini]

I agree. I was assuming particular circumstances that were rather more specific than apply to many micro-limit players. In my case, I was determined to survive if at all possible on my initial buy-in, which I just barely did, although my risk of ruin at one point was substantially more than 5%! This has required dropping back at two different points when I got significantly below 200 BBs.

By the way, a good aspect of doing this was that it taught me excellent bankroll management skills from the start. It's not a bad way to begin your poker avocation, although obviously you risk losing the initial buyin anyway because almost nobody starts out as a winning player, and it costs money to learn the game.

[Webster]

A VERY good player can win 5BB's an hour but why would anybody that can win 5 BB stay at this level, LOL

A good player can win 4 BB's. I played $1 and was at the 4.5 level and now am at 2/4 at 3.9 and looking to move up soon now that I'm 400 $6 BB's

[richie]

Hi Warik,

I agree with Webster that 4BB/hr is attainable at the lower limits (at Party Poker). I've using Poker Tracker since June and been averaging 4.3BB/hr at .50/1 and 3.8BB/hr at the 1/2 limit. That's only 20000 hands, though, with 2/3 of the hands at 1/2. I'm currently playing 2/4, winning about 2.6BB/hr, about 6500 hands. I should add that's playing 1 table at a time, while surfing the web and/or watching TV /images/graemlins/blush.gif Can't remember exactly, but I think the rule of thumb is 25,000 hands before your win rate can be fairly reliable. A "seasoned" 2+2er could tell you. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Uppercut]

In about 160 hours of play at .5-1, I am averaging about 3.5 BB per hour.