A question for the more experienced posters about win rates...

[Pog0]

with about 13k hands played this month, a single session can influence my bb/100 rate +/- 1, so you can't put any stake in these figures for a long time to come and by the time they do come, at least the first half of your data is no longer applicable. Lots of reasons people don't think winrate discussions are very valuable.

You estimate what you're at (read: estimate), and you can set your expected hourly returns based on that but you can never be sure, partly because there is no sure answer. The game dynamics are always changing; a winrate isn't ever a static statistic.

[jt1]

Let's say that 3bb/100 is what a great player can earn? Does that mean that on average an average player is loosing 2bb/100 due to bad play? I would have to yes.

So if you were a 1bb/100 player over 200K hands and you looked over all 200K hands, you should be able to spot 4k bb worth of mistakes.

Say your goal is 2bb/100. Does this mean that a 1000 hand session where you waste less than 10 bb in bad play is a well-played session?

Holy Crap, I'm a Poo-Bah now. Well, sorry to dilute the title.

[scotty34]

Two identical players can have long-term winrates that are drastically different from one another if one practises good table selection and the other does not. Not making mistakes is not the only source of winnings - much more importantly is that your opponents make more and worse mistakes.