What's your BB/100 at different limits?

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
focusing on bb/100 with less than 200K hands is foolish

[/ QUOTE ]

This is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not. Too many get hung up on bb/100 with miniscule sample sizes and delude themselves into thinking that they are something that they are not. Focusing on making the proper play given the circumstances is what people need to concern themselves with, especially when considering moving up. Running hot for 10K hands doesn't mean that one doesn't have a slew of holes in their game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I agree with all this. But that doesn't mean that we should ignore BB/100 completely until 200k hands. (sorry if my previous post was a little brusque).

[BluEsiNsOuL]

Very impressive!

How long did it take you to finish this whole ladder?

[DMBFan23]

.10/.20, .25/.50 - I dont know, I didnt have PT

.5/1, 4 tables - 4 BB/100 over an insignificant sample size of 10K

1/2, 2, then 3, then 4 tables - I was met with a 130 BB downswing, and then after 20K total I was back up to 1.5 BB/100

1/2 6max, 3 tables - 6K hands, ~3 BB/100

2/4, 3/6, 2 then 3 tables - 10K hands each, 2.2 BB/100 at each limit

2/4 6max, 2 then 3 tables - 8 K hands, 180 BB downswing followed by clawing back to breakeven.

5/10 6max, one then (now) two tables - 12 K hands, down 20 Big Bets - that's like (.18) BB/100 or something like that.

conclusion. I'm up some $ after a ridiculously small sample. I've also got it on pretty good authority that I'm a winning player at 5/10, though I certainly lost some confidence for a while

[Shillx]

2/4 - 13k hands, 2.6 BB/100
3/6 - ~120k hands, - .05 BB/100
5/10 - ~150k hands, + .15 BB/100

I dunno there are more but I'm not sure what. I wish I had PT the whole time though.

[Entity]

.25/.5, somewhere around 8-10k hands, 8bb/100

.5/1, lots of hands -- 25k range -- 1.5bb/100 (this includes drunken 2+2 games which I never bothered to delete from my sessions)

1/2, mostly 6max, 30k hands, 3.3bb/100

2/4, 6max and full ring mixed, 10k hands, 6bb/100

3/6, full ring, 6k hands, 3bb/100

3/6, 6max, 7k hands, 2.5bb/100 (pokerstars)

5/10, 6max, 32k hands, 1.6bb/100

Well, I've only just starting playing for cash on PokerStars .02/.04 after reading Ed Miller's books...

I've only played about 1500 hands, but so far I am averaging 12BB/100 hands. Small sample size, I know, but a good start is a good start. I played for about an hour last night and made about 30BB from a marvelously fishy table (they were calling me down with bottom pair!! It was awesome). At this rate I'll be at the .05/.10 tables in no time.

[shadow29]

[ QUOTE ]
Very impressive!

How long did it take you to finish this whole ladder?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm playing 3/6 SH now. I started at .5/1 in December of 2004.

Also, Bob is right on the fact that BB/100 isn't a "solid" number. I think, however, that it is useful in some respects.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
focusing on bb/100 with less than 200K hands is foolish

[/ QUOTE ]

This is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not. Too many get hung up on bb/100 with miniscule sample sizes and delude themselves into thinking that they are something that they are not. Focusing on making the proper play given the circumstances is what people need to concern themselves with, especially when considering moving up. Running hot for 10K hands doesn't mean that one doesn't have a slew of holes in their game. I played 30K hands in June and had a bb/100 of -0.04bb/100, and I am not a losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 30k hands is a significant sample size; to be a loser over such a stretch would suggest you have some holes in your game.

[Yort Mada]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
focusing on bb/100 with less than 200K hands is foolish

[/ QUOTE ]

This is dumb.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it's not. Too many get hung up on bb/100 with miniscule sample sizes and delude themselves into thinking that they are something that they are not. Focusing on making the proper play given the circumstances is what people need to concern themselves with, especially when considering moving up. Running hot for 10K hands doesn't mean that one doesn't have a slew of holes in their game. I played 30K hands in June and had a bb/100 of -0.04bb/100, and I am not a losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 30k hands is a significant sample size; to be a loser over such a stretch would suggest you have some holes in your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are wrong. 30k is not a big enough sample size for the long run. i'd say 100k+ is where you can start thinking you've made it or not.

[pokerstudAA]

I have really been needing to analyze my game. After taking a break from grinding recently - now is the time. This seems like a good place for it. I started at .5/1 in May 2004. All party.


.5/1 - 15,809 hands +4.5BB/100
1/2 - 10,908 hands +2.2BB/100
2/4 - 12,173 hands +1.3 BB/100
5/10 - 74,700 Hands +0.6 BB/100 %50/50 party/empire.
10/20 - 5,000 hands +2.8 BB/100
15/30 - 119 hands +18.5 BB/100

1/2 6max - 11,000 Hands +3.8BB/100
5/10 6max - 6,961 hands. (.85)/100BB.


2+2 tables (.5/1) - 2,354 hands - 6.93BB/100 (27%vp/20%pfr)_ (OMFG! I PWND ALL YOU MICROLIMIT FISHIES!!!!11111 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img])


So....rakeback has sweetened the deal at 5/10 but I am planning on adjusting the limit I play or switch to MTT's. The limit grind has worn on me.......there was a 25K breakeven stretch in the middle. I am sure some of that was bad play.