A question on "poker for profit"

[cagedman]

Hi 2+2,

I've been playing holdem again quite a bit now for 2 months or so. I used to play quite a few SNGs around this time last year due to the easy income from the 'Chris Moneymaker' effect of people flocking to the sites and jamming their stack. I stopped playing due to the 10+1s tightening up signifigantly and it didn't feel worth my time any more. I've since returned to reap what WPT/WSOP has sewn.

I've built up my $200 deposit into a hair over $3k and I'm ready to start turning this into an industrial moneymaking operation. I've got all the tools (two 20.1" 1600x1200 panels, PokerOffice & Pokertracker, etc.) and I can consistently beat the games I've tried [25NL, limit up to 2/4, SNGs up to 20+2]. (I think? Any opinions on ballpark how many hands of data would produce, with a reasonable stdd, $/100 and stdd($/100)stdd figures?)


There's a lot of discussion about ROI, etc. in terms of SNGs... and $/100, etc. But to me it seems like the only truly important figures, vis-a-vis deciding what and how you're going to play, is the aggregate hourly rate and standard deviation of all of your play. I feel this is true because your $/100 will vary depending on the number of tables played, etc. so it makes sense to recenter this under the conditions that you will be playing... as the buck stops at the bottom line. (With the assumption that one isn't concerned with the volume of mental effort per hour... in other words... so long as one feels that making twice as much per hour is still twice as good even if it is twice as mentally strenuous, insofar as it doesn't prevent you from playing the number of hours per week that you'd like)


Now that you've been spammed.. here's the question: It seems like the common 2+2 right of passage(s) is 'moving up'. Is moving up the right goal? as opposed to moving laterally (more tables)? Or some combination of the two?

These questions could always be answered with the numbers if enough hands were played in the right scenerios... but I guess I'm looking to find direction pre-emptively.

Could playing the huge limit games compare with thrashing 8 tables of $25NL and $20SNG? When is moving up superior to moving laterally to more tables? Do any pros play a dozen $25 tables instead of 200NL? I guess I just need convincing on why moving up.. even as an expert-expert... is the right move?

Even moving up to 50NL without reducing the number of tables... can it be worth it? Will the extra stack depth even be worth it when you can knock $25NL players off their stack so easily?

Bankroll and equipment aside... where's the real money here?

If you would be so gracious, please feel fee to chime in with your thoughts.

At this point I think my goal is to play 4 tables of 6 handed 25NL and 4 tables of 20+2 SNGs... I think that will produce the maximum hourly rate for someone without the skill to compete at the huge games yet (200+2 SNGs, etc).

Thanks!

P.s. I hope no one minds; I'm cross posting on small stakes NL/PL & Mid/High stks NL/PL.

E.P.F.