I don't get Stats - Homer's Streaks Spreadsheet - X-post

[Sarge85]

Is this really possible?

I’ve played around a lot with Homer’s Streak spreadsheet.

Those of you not familiar with the spreadsheet, it’s designed to show how streaky your play can be. At the same time, it shows the effect of the “long run” and despite any short term streak, if you are a proven winner, you will have a positive trend line over the “long run”.

It uses a combination of win rate and Standard Deviation to come up with potential results.

More on the design, and spreadsheet can be found here:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/...o=&fpart=1

I’ve created a few additional charts to extrapolate what 4 tabling, 2-4, 5 hours a day, 20 days a month, for a year. What I would consider Semi Pro, Pro Hours in a year.

I have “Streaks” graphs representing:
[*]1hr session, 4 tables = 4 Table Hours (Representing a possible hour in a 5 hour session – relevance = Extremely Low/Irrelevant
[*]5 hr session, 4 tables = 20 Hours (Representing one full day/full session – relevance = Very Low
[*]5 Days, @ 5 hr sessions, @ 4 tables = 100 Table Hours (Representing one week – relevance = Low[*]20 Days @ 5 hr Sessions @ 4 tables = 400 Table Hours (Representing one month play – relevance = somewhat relevant
[*]12 Months @ 5 hr Sessions @ 4 tables = 4800 table hours (Representing one year of play – relevance = very relevant

So anyway my ultimate question is, how reliable of a tool is this.

By SD is 15 BB HR.
My WR is 2.0/BB per HR
BB = 4.00
(These figures can be gathered out of PT)


I recalculated the spreadsheet 100 times (representing 100 different poker years)

Lowest Year: $28,745
Highest Year: $50,489

Average Year: $38,884

The Avg Year is what I have a question about. The win rate isn’t anything extravagant, and the SD is what I believe “typical” (though I’m not as sure on SD)

However averaging nearly $39,000 a year at $2/$4 seems high to me.

Is the spreadsheet calculations inaccurate?
Are my playing time assumptions wrong?
Could one expect to put in 5 hours a day, 20 days a month, and expect to make $39,000 a year?

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[fyodor]

It adds up to what it adds up to.

It's up to you to put in the hours and the days and maintain that winrate.

[Oilcan]

The "trick" will be staying at 2.0 win rate.

Re-run it again at say 1.5 or 1.25, see what it shows.

You should message Limitplayer about real life results of multi-tabling low limits. I believe he did so for a year, with good results, but more importantly many K's of hands.

regards

[MicroBob]

you don't really need Homer's spreadsheet to figure out average annual earnings.


First of all...your 2BB/hr win-rate (roughly 3BB/100) might be tough to sustain.

But if you do sustain it than that's $32/hr for the 4 tables.
For a 5-hour day that's $160.
For a 4-day week that's $640.
For a 50-week year that's $32k.


And this is not even including bonuses and/or rake-back.
However it DOES involve a fairly decent win-rate at 2/4.


Sklansky said in SSHE forward that making $50k/yr at 3/6 multi-tabling isn't really that impossible.
This is true.
and the math of this is pretty easy to see.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
you don't really need Homer's spreadsheet to figure out average annual earnings.


First of all...your 2BB/hr win-rate (roughly 3BB/100) might be tough to sustain.

But if you do sustain it than that's $32/hr for the 4 tables.
For a 5-hour day that's $160.
For a 4-day week that's $640.
For a 50-week year that's $32k.


And this is not even including bonuses and/or rake-back.
However it DOES involve a fairly decent win-rate at 2/4.


Sklansky said in SSHE forward that making $50k/yr at 3/6 multi-tabling isn't really that impossible.
This is true.
and the math of this is pretty easy to see.

[/ QUOTE ]

MicroBob, I'd like your satement a lot more if it were "isn't impossible" rather than "isnt that impossible." I think that downplays the difficulty, particularly considering the OP was talking about 4 tabling.

To make 50,000 dollars a year (I actually figured it out at $50,004) with a winrate of 3BB/100, you have to play 5556 hands a week. At 4 tables and 180 hands an hour that's just under 31 hours a week for a 50 week year. Maintaining a really great winrate the entire time. When you figure in the starting up and shutting down and record keeping that's at least a 35 hour week, maybe more. And after a year or so you're really hitting the its a hard grind territory.

I think the only debatable assumption in there is the hands per hour. I know lot's of folks would say 220 or 240 hands an hour. But there aren't a constant flow of great tables at 3/6 and with the switching around and whatnot, I think 180 hands an hour over the course of 278,000 hands for the year is probably pretty reasonable.

Ok, and so that's with a great winrate. If you can sustain that over that many hands, my hats off to you, but I think its an extraordinary player.

Now take a more reasonable 2 BB/100 winrate. Now to make your 50,004 dollars in a 50 week year, you have to play 8334 hands a week. Every week. Week in and Week out without fail. And again next year, and the year after that. And maintain that 2BB/100 rate which is still a good rrate. In any case, for four tables again at 180 hands an hour, now you are talking 46 hours a week. So figure at least a fifty hour work week.

That's 417,000 hands a year.

I say that's not impossible, but its pretty damn hard.


Is it any wonder that the most serious guy I know making a real go at being a 3/6 pro (and I have nothing but respect for him)-- bisonbison -- went and got a real job?




--Zetack

Allright to be fair, i should throw rakeback and bonus in there. If you are the 2 Bb/100 player and get the 417,000 hands a year you're talking about 12,500 dollars in rakeback. Assuming you aren't a huge bonus whore, since chasing bonus's adds a significant time cost to your play and may lead you from your optimium games, lets figure in 400 month in bonus's. So another five grand.

I'm not a math whiz enought to figure out how many hands you can cut out and still hit the 50k figure, since your rakeback will go down as you cut out hands. Obviously you can't cut out a quarter of your hands. 1/5 or 1/6 maybe? So that knocks our 2 BB/100 winner down to about 38 hours of play a week, plus start up, shut down, record keeping etc.

Still not easy.

[Sarge85]

[I think the only debatable assumption in there is the hands per hour. I know lot's of folks would say 220 or 240 hands an hour. But there aren't a constant flow of great tables at 3/6 and with the switching around and whatnot, I think 180 hands an hour over the course of 278,000 hands for the year is probably pretty reasonable.



[/ QUOTE ]

The bulk of my PT data supports the 220-240 number. I play mostly nowadays at Poker Room skins, and their software is reasonable as far as speed i would say. Not quite as quick as Party, but still quite a bit faster than alot of the other software out there.

You make so other very good points too.

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
[I think the only debatable assumption in there is the hands per hour. I know lot's of folks would say 220 or 240 hands an hour. But there aren't a constant flow of great tables at 3/6 and with the switching around and whatnot, I think 180 hands an hour over the course of 278,000 hands for the year is probably pretty reasonable.



[/ QUOTE ]

The bulk of my PT data supports the 220-240 number. I play mostly nowadays at Poker Room skins, and their software is reasonable as far as speed i would say. Not quite as quick as Party, but still quite a bit faster than alot of the other software out there.

You make so other very good points too.

Sarge[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that something that poker tracker actually tracks? I'm not in front of it right now. I have no doubt that if you sat down and got on four tables and then didn't have to switch tables until you stopped playing that you'd get 220-240 hands an hour even at full tables. Its the switching tables that really drags that down.

Ok, assuming PT does actually track that and your data is accurrate I'd wonder if you're playing full time or not and limiting yourself to four tables or not (the more tables the less table switching lowers your average, and if your aren't full time, there may be more opportunity to play during peak times so less table switching might be necessary).

But lets assume you are so that your numbers hold up for a full time player. For your 2 BB/100 winner you're probably playing at least two sessions a day to make that over forty hours a week number. The time getting on the site and sitting on waiting lists before you even get playing has to be factored in to the amount of time you spend playing poker, and that would drag your hands per/hour average down a bit. And of course this factor is magnified at just four tables compared to eight.


However, you're right of course, that the hands per hour is the debatable part of my assumptions. But I still think, even using very optimistic assumptions, 50k a year at 3/6 is an incredible feat--not impossible, but very impressive. And a lot of work.

Although, again, I haven't fully accounted for the effect of rakeback and bonus's and if you can eight table the 3/6 for a decent winrate it becomes less difficult.

--Zetack

[MicroBob]

I agree that it's basically easier said than done.

I am living proof of this in fact as I am NOT making as much on the ring-games as I would like.

I fully agree that maintaining a 3BB/100 win-rate would be quite difficult...and certainly most players who are good enough to do this would be moving up at some point.

I do know a couple of players who have done quite well at the 3/6 and 5/10 limits though as full-timers. They are more risk-averse so they don't move up.



One counter-argument regarding the hands-played figures is that it is now VERY possible to average even more hands per hour at 3/6 on the 6-max tables on party and I don't think a 2BB/100 win-rate on those tables is AT ALL unrealistic.
Many of those 6-max tables will be in the 90-95 hds/hr range.
So those who can 4-table the 6-max's should be able to get 350 hands an hour without too much difficulty.


Your other thought about it becoming a 'real grind' is certainly correct.
I'm kind of bouncing around from ring-games to SNG's to poker-stars W$ satellites to occasional regular MTT's just to keep it interesting.
I believe that the EV I gain in giving myself some variety is well worth it.
Even if I would be more profitable on the ring-games in the long-run I think it's okay. I know I'm +EV on the other games as well....and I just haven't had the discipline to put in my regular 7k+ hands a week.
I have so much respect for those who can do that. I am learning that no matter how much I try to crank myself up I just can't seem to grind it out like that consistently.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that it's basically easier said than done.

I am living proof of this in fact as I am NOT making as much on the ring-games as I would like.

I fully agree that maintaining a 3BB/100 win-rate would be quite difficult...and certainly most players who are good enough to do this would be moving up at some point.

I do know a couple of players who have done quite well at the 3/6 and 5/10 limits though as full-timers. They are more risk-averse so they don't move up.



One counter-argument regarding the hands-played figures is that it is now VERY possible to average even more hands per hour at 3/6 on the 6-max tables on party and I don't think a 2BB/100 win-rate on those tables is AT ALL unrealistic.
Many of those 6-max tables will be in the 90-95 hds/hr range.
So those who can 4-table the 6-max's should be able to get 350 hands an hour without too much difficulty.


Your other thought about it becoming a 'real grind' is certainly correct.
I'm kind of bouncing around from ring-games to SNG's to poker-stars W$ satellites to occasional regular MTT's just to keep it interesting.
I believe that the EV I gain in giving myself some variety is well worth it.
Even if I would be more profitable on the ring-games in the long-run I think it's okay. I know I'm +EV on the other games as well....and I just haven't had the discipline to put in my regular 7k+ hands a week.
I have so much respect for those who can do that. I am learning that no matter how much I try to crank myself up I just can't seem to grind it out like that consistently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah MicroBob, my comment was a nitpick of the highest order...I just thought there was the implication that the 50k at 3/6 isn't a difficult task. And it clearly is.

Of course if you do even a third of your hands at 5/10 it becomes significantly easier (asuming a comparable winrate there.

And I'll make one more nit as long as I'm at it. If you can pull 90-95 hands an hour on a table of 6 max, there's no way over the course of a week where you have to hit 8400 hands that you're going to average 350 hands an hour for that stretch. This seems so obvious to me that I'm surprised its even debatable. Does anybody see why or am I the lone voice in the wilderness on this one?