% of hands won for a winning player/expert

[plj8624]

In a limit holdem ring game, what % of hands should a winning player expect to win? I assume the answer changes depending on whether there are 9 or 10 players and how aggressive or wild the game is. Mathematically, one would think that a winner would win 11 percent of hands in a nine man game and 10 percent of hands in a ten man game. Statistically, I can see how non-selfweighting expert play might win fewer than your share of pots but more money. Feel free to give a range of answers as long as you explain what would affect the range.

[uuDevil]

About 6%-8% depending on how tight he plays. This is based on numbers I've seen on this site. It's less than "fair share" because he plays far fewer hands than the table average. But he wins a greater percentage of hands he sees the flop with than a looser player does, as well as more money.

[jakethebake]

A different way of answering is the standard one big bet per hour winning rate. Although this may have gone up in the last couple of years based on the flood of fish.

[Trainwreck]

It's not # of pots, it's quality .

>TW<

[davidross]

I win around 8%. If I win 9 I generally have a big night and 10 or more is a huge night. But that isn't always indicative. The more important stat to me is %won when seeing the flop. If that isover 30% I do well.

[CrisBrown]

Hi plj8624,

I don't think the percentage of pots won -- as a function of hands dealt -- is all that useful a metric. The more useful metric is the percentage of pots won as a function of hands played. A winning player will win more than his "share" of the pots he plays, because he will be playing better cards, and playing his cards better.

In other words, he may play only 12% of the hands dealt, but if he's typically in a two- or three-way pot, he'll win 50-60% (or more) of the time when he's in a pot. And that is how he makes a profit.

Cris

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi plj8624,

I don't think the percentage of pots won -- as a function of hands dealt -- is all that useful a metric. The more useful metric is the percentage of pots won as a function of hands played. A winning player will win more than his "share" of the pots he plays, because he will be playing better cards, and playing his cards better.

[/ QUOTE ]

This approach is limited. An utter rock may win much more than the average percentage of pots contributed to, but against decent opposition who can recognize a rock, those pots won't be very large. I suspect a good player will have certain combinations of winning percentages for hands seen, flops seen, and hands shown down.

[plj8624]

Thanks for your responses everyone.

Cris: an expert might play only 12% of hands dealt? Sounds way too tight to me. I have been playing about 24%, that is in loose low limit games.

[CrisBrown]

Hi plj,

[ QUOTE ]
Cris: an expert might play only 12% of hands dealt? Sounds way too tight to me. I have been playing about 24%, that is in loose low limit games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was merely giving an example for math purposes. If this hypothetical expert plays 12% of his hands, and wins half of the pots he's involved in, he'll win a net 6% of hands. That would be less than his "fair share" at a 9-player table, but he'd still show a profit.

I wasn't suggesting the 12% figure as a target.

Cris

[mrbaseball]

And this applies to televised poker how?