How good is "good"?

[cavalier]

How many BB an hour should you be making, and for how many hours, before you consider that game beat... and think about moving up?

[MRBAA]

Depends on your goal -- if you are looking to improve and playing at lower limits (as I am) I think you can move up when you can beat a game for 2bb/hr. For example, I averaged more than 4bb/hr in 2-4 before moving to 5-10. As the stakes get higher and the players get better, it's probably less. Many players suggest 1 or 1.5 bb hour in 20-40 and up as being a top player's win rate.

[Andy B]

Sounds like y'all are talking on-line, which I've never done. It seems to me that if you can win 4 BB/hr at a small game, you should be able to win at least 1 BB/hr in a much larger game. Variance will be higher, of course, but I don't think your win rate needs to be 4 BB/hr before you move up to the next level.

I don't think I'd have a set number of hours or a specific win rate in mind before moving up. I don't even know that I'd make beating your current limit for anything a requirement. I don't know what the rake is like in micro-limit games, but it could be that if it's comparatively high and the players are decent, the game might be hard to beat. You might be struggling down there, when in reality you can beat, say, the $5/10 game. You've got a day job, right? Forget about all those recommendations that you spend 1000 hours at a given limit or that you have 300 BB in your bankroll. If you're beating your current game, fabulous. Watch the game you're thinking about playing in. If you're on-line, you will be able to do so unobtrusively. You should be able to pick out glaring errors in your prospective opponents' play. If not, either the game is tough enough not to bother with, or your game needs some work itself. The old adage really is true: if you're in a game for half an hour, and you don't know who the sucker is, you're it. I usually know who the suckers are when they're calling the list down. If you feel confident that you can beat that game, get in there and gamble. Make sure you have 25 BB or so that you're not going to miss too much. If it starts to feel uncomfortable, quit. They'll be there tomorrow or next week or next month or whenever you decide to try it again.

[patrick dicaprio]

i dont think your horly rate means much at low limits. I spent a grand total of 8 hours, in one day, playing 1-5 before i move up to 5-10. When i played holdem for a year, maybe once a month i spent one session at 3-6 before moving up to 6-12.

the key is not how much you win but do you play better than your opponents. these are not always the same. if you can look at a game and say "here are my opponents errors" and "i can take advantage of them by doing x" then you can likely beat the game.

Pat

[Fraubump]

Since the # of hands/hr is so different for online vs B&M it would be much more useful if posters would discuss this kind of topic in terms of BB/hand or BB/100 hands.

[MRBAA]

Pat and Andy, I have to disagree. While it's true that you may not be able to beat a game for much, or beat a particular structure, if you can't beat lower games I don't think you will beat higher ones. I know for myself that I beat $1-3 a little live, beat $2-4 online pretty well, and lost a bit at $1-5 live and $1-2 online (I just am not comfortable with overante games yet). It's not that hard to notice other players' errors. It's a lot harder to understand your own, learn how to apply your knowledge in the heat of the moment, spot your leaks, and generally develop a feel.

Another factor, it's much easier to move up playing with "poker money". I know for me, the move to $5-10 has been a lot less intimidating playing with a bankroll of $1,500+ of winnings amassed at lower limits.

At any limit, I think it's just kidding yourself to say you're good enough to move up if you aren't winning where you are.

[patrick dicaprio]

i dont disagree with you.but you cant be seduced into thinking "i am winning so i am ready to move up." you should be able to articulate why you will succeed. but you are right that if you are losing at one level it is not likely you will win at a higher level. just keep in mind you can be a winner and not really know why.

Pat

[Andy B]

I have beaten local hold'em games at the $6/12, $15/30, and $30/60 level. I never was able to beat $4/8 and under. True, if you can't beat a small game, it's probably an indication that you won't beat the larger game, but I don't think it's a given, especially if you're not losing much at the small game.

It might make a difference to you psychologically if your bankroll comes from poker winnings. I don't think it would make much difference to me whether it was money I had won playing poker or money I had inherited. There's nothing at all wrong with working your way up slowly, and that's probably best for the vast majority of players. It does however ensure that you won't be taking any shots at super-juicy $30/60 games that might come your way. The money I started playing $30/60 stud/8 with was not money that I won playing poker.

FWIW, tracking BB/hand is impractical and almost certainly not worthwhile when playing live. Frankly, I think that time is the relevant factor when comparing your on-line results (of which I have none) to your live results. Time is what you put in, not "hands."

[cavalier]

Andy,

I am experiencing the same thing you did.

The lower the limits, the harder time I have. I believe the reason is the same as why I sometimes struggle at my weekly 1/5 hilo game.

I think the reason is simple. There are 4-6 guys in every showdown. Raises mean almost nothing. Bluffs are pretty useless. Semi-bluffs are simply smart bluffs that just fill up the pot you have a pretty good shot at winning.

The lower limits tend to be filled with sailors. They want all 7 of their cards and they want to see your hands. If the ante doesn't kill you as you wait for 'super strong' starting hands, the showdowns will when they catch their miracles.

The higher limits tend to play better. Bets are respected. Raises, check-raising, bluffs... they all mean something. There's no need to remember 14 dead cards because there's usually only 4-6 dead ones after 4th street.

I made the move up after watching for a while. I saw some stuff that I liked and gave it a shot. I've doubled my entire bankroll in about 13 hours. I've lost 3 out of 11 sessions and feel that I've found my seat.

Thanks for all of your replies guys.

[Andy B]

Is your local $1-5 high-low game raked? If it isn't raked and you aren't cleaning up, you probably don't play high-low very well. That's OK, a lot of "good" players don't, but you need to get Ray's book and read it several times and take it to heart. The notion that bigger games are easier to beat because the players play better can be pretty dangerous.