Simple 5/10 Limit Question

b33nz · #1 08-04-2005, 11:14 PM

Hey guys.. I have a somewhat obvious question that I would like to have answered by as many people as possible.

A friend of mine believes that you can make and maintain at least 3 BB's ($30) per hour playing a long handed single table $5/$10 limit hold 'em game over the course of 24,000 hands (roughly 400 hours). The EV of this would be +.50 cents per hand for 24,000 hands! I would say there's no chance unless he gets a 400 hour luck streak... which I've never heard of before [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Just because a player is gifted doesnt make him immune to getting sucked out just like the rest of us... so think about that. Also take into effect the rake. Now a player needs to beat the house on top of his $30 per hour wage.

And one other note: $5/$10 limit is not $2/$4 limit anymore. Many people playing $5/$10 are casual players who take the game somewhat seriously. They might have read a book or two and know what to do in many situations. They also have experience from previous limits like $2/$4 and $3/$6... The games at $5/$10 are also more agressive (from my experience) and a tad bit tighter than the games at $3/$6.

All these factors put together make it harder to make money... and to be making $30 per hour? Well, you decide.

I tried to tell him that it's probably impossible even if you are the best limit hold em player in the world... but he didn't believe me. So we made an actual money wager to see who is right and I chose to 2+2 forums to see what you guys thought about it.

So just reply with your honest opinion and I would greatly appreciate it ^_^.

Thanks...

AL5AcE · #2 08-04-2005, 11:20 PM

I think 3BB/100 single tabling 5/10 is possible. He will have to run good though, but within 24,000 hands 3BB/100 is not that uncommon.

toss · #3 08-04-2005, 11:21 PM

Its quite possible, but I don't think its sustainable unless your frined gets 100 hands playing one table in an hour.

5/10 is a bit more tight and more aggro. To win you have to actually pay attention to how your opponent plays and play accordingly.

Many hands are HU so you have to skillfully apply aggression in the right spots. Otherwise your winrate will suffer since all your profits comes from value betting the right players.

#4 08-04-2005, 11:40 PM

5/10 is the drug of my choice these days. 3bb is possible over 24k hands,l but the following 24k hands will be tough. By 75k hands his true winrate will appear.

If he is used to lower limits than 5/10 then he should play 5/10 at night only, when the tables are softer

b33nz · #5 08-05-2005, 12:38 AM

Just for the record... hands dealt per hour on a 10 handed single table are about give or take 60 hands an hour. So you guys think 3BB/60 is possible? Like I said, it equals out to +50 cents per hand for every single one of those 24,000 hands...

BTW, 400 hours is about 3 months worth of daily play. I don't know about you, but I haven't had a good run of cards for 3 months straight... and a real good run of cards for that. I believe you would need a good run of cards just to maintain 2 BB's an hour in $5/$10 due to the skill level there after 400 hours in my opinion.

Another note: If I did my math right, 3BB/100 is equal to about 1.8BB/60, or $18. In order for 3BB/60 to be possible, a player would need to be making 5BB/100!! Now come on, $50.00 per 100 hands consistentley after 240 times?!?!

I'm not asking you guys to side with me just so I can win my bet, I'm only asking to be reasonable here. And to say that this kind of influx is uncommon.... I don't know if I'd agree with it.

Argus · #6 08-05-2005, 12:46 AM

</font><blockquote><font class="small">En réponse à:</font><hr />
Just for the record... hands dealt per hour on a 10 handed single table are about give or take 60 hands an hour. So you guys think 3BB/60 is possible? Like I said, it equals out to +50 cents per hand for every single one of those 24,000 hands...

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think a skilled player would have to get too lucky to beat Party 5/10 for 3 BB/100 over 24k hands if they were single tabling. I'd say single tabling can add between 0.5-1 bb/100 to your winrate compared to 4 tables, at least in my experience (based on an insufficient sample size). 3 BB/60 is not feasible without a huge luck streak; that's almost twice 3 BB/100. I believe even the very best players would have trouble doing this.

bobbyi · #7 08-05-2005, 01:24 AM

I don't think anyone's expectation is that high. I guess someone could get really really lucky and run that good for 24000 hands once in a while.

TheHip41 · #8 08-05-2005, 01:42 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think 3BB/100 single tabling 5/10 is possible. He will have to run good though, but within 24,000 hands 3BB/100 is not that uncommon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but he's not getting 100 hands every hour. He's lucky to get 25-30 per hour at B&M. What he's saying, 30/hour at 5-10 live is basically running at 9BB/100 over a long strech of time, physically impossible.

b33nz · #9 08-05-2005, 02:32 PM

My fault, guys. I should have said this strictly applies to online poker. And online you play about 60 hands an hour in a long handed $5/$10 limit game.

drewjustdrew · #10 08-05-2005, 04:59 PM

I just started tracking my multitabling at 4 $5-10 full tables. I don't have pokertracker, so I'm doing it manually. In 4000 hands, I'm just over 3 BB per 100, so at a single table, I can't imagine I play worse than multitable. But maybe one of my leaks is fancy play syndrome, which I do less of when I multitable...

Granted, I have 20000 more hands to go to see your criteria.

Let's put it this way, the old standard was one BB per hour live. You get about 3 times as many hands per hour online, so 3bb/ hour should be very doable. This should be better than 3 BB per 100, more like 3 BB per 75.