[Carl_William]

3.4k is hardly enough hands to determine if you are a winning player. A way to evaluate your play could be….

But 3.4 K hands is a good start.

Assuming you are a steady player, not prone to excessive tilt, then consider….

Assume an average session for you is about 170 hands; is so, then this would amount to about 20 sessions. Of if you consider 200 hands as an average session – then 3.4 K hands would be equivalent to 18 sessions.
I suggest you keep a running average of how you do in each group of your last 10 sessions (say groups of 10 sessions and about 200 hands per session). Then keep a running average of your last ten groups of ten sessions. If your running average per group of last ten groups (about 2000 hands) is usually about 50%(i.e., 5 wins in 10 sessions), then you are an average player, maybe just paying the table rent. If you average 6 wins in 10, then you are a slightly above average player. If you win 7.5 or more times per group of ten sessions, then you are a very good player. You want to keep this running average up to 60% better. If it starts to go down, then try to figure out why? Are you comfortable with the betting stakes? When you are a very good player, how much you win is dependent on many factors; some are game selection, how you feel, time of day on the Internet(certain times have more average players then usual) – things like this.