BB/100 expectation in long run, winning players

[jaybird]

I think it also depends greatly on the type of game.

I have about 30k hands for limit and only 2k hands for NL, yet I am averaging 4BB/100 for limit and 16BB/100 for NL.

I know my sample space for NL is small, but I think game type makes a big difference.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
It's important to distinguish between full tables and short handed tables. A winning player equally skilled at both will typically have a larger BB / 100 at a table with less players involved.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this true? I know a good shorthanded player can expect to earn more, but I thought most of that came from the extra hands/hour not a higher BB/100.

But of course there are some really bad players in many of the shorthanded games so maybe you are correct.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I know my sample space for NL is small, but I think game type makes a big difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true, but NL win rates are all skewed to begin with.

[ZeeJustin]

It comes for the extra hands played per 100 hands, i.e everyone sees more flops.

Just think about your standard deviation per hand 10 handed versus your standard deviated heads up per hand.

[jonahmavesin]

No, that's just fine. Thanks - that's what my brain and by pokertracker has been telling me, but with all the number thrown around here I thought it sounded high.

BB/hr of course would be back down around 2+, as you said.

[jaybird]

[ QUOTE ]
Very true, but NL win rates are all skewed to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can they be skewed in the long run?

Its an accurate measure of profit over a given amount of hands. True, your SD in NL will be very high. But comparing BB/100 hands after 30,000 hands of both NL and Limit would be a great way to measure how well you are doing.