Doing an experiment at NL50. Goodbye BB/100

whittiphil · #1 09-26-2005, 07:05 PM

Hi guys,

I recently switched to NL50, and am having trouble with the variance. I then read this post by gigabet:
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...mp;o=&vc=1

I've decided I'm not going to look at PTBB/100 for the next week. I have an ample bankroll for the level I'm playing at, and after 10 hours playing NL50, I was making $40 an hour and thinking I was the best poker player to ever have lived. After 4 more hours my hourly rate is $2 an hour (much higher factoring in rb) My PTBB/100 at the moment is 0.61 after 4300 hands... but I know I'm running cold (losing with KK and QQ). But bb/100 just puts me in a terrible mood. I'm just going to play the cards and worry about my hourly rate when I'm short on money.

You see, I'm not short of money, I don't need this as a job right now.. but I want to be a significant source of income by december. I've been playing 3 months so far, and I've improved so much that I can't even imagine what I'll be like in 3 months more time. I've improved so much that I'm fully aware of just how bad I am right now compared to great players.

So I'm not opening "Ring Game Statistics" in PT until next week. Then I'll look at my ptbb/100 and we'll see what it says, but right now it's making me disappointed in myself, and that's making me play badly.

Anyone else get negatively effected by their bb/100?

Hoopster81 · #2 09-26-2005, 07:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone else get negatively effected by their bb/100?

[/ QUOTE ]

I never really look at it

Simplistic · #3 09-26-2005, 07:29 PM

heh, i'm in the early stages of tracking my play. it's funny to see that if I stack someone it'll bump my BB/100 by 1.

long term i want to see 8-10PTBB/100. 10k hands should give me an indication of whether i'm a winning player or not, at least at the NL200 level.

whittiphil · #4 09-26-2005, 07:33 PM

Even after 10000 hands, if you get stacked twice your BB/100 will nose dive

Simplistic · #5 09-26-2005, 07:35 PM

true but i'll get a better indication of where my game is at.

Malachii · #6 09-26-2005, 07:38 PM

Hey Whittiphil,

I agree, being overly conscious of your BB/100 will only hurt your quality of play. What I generally try to do is go through poker and look at the hands where I have lost a lot of money and analzye what I could have done differently. If you get all in with AK versus KQ on a KK2 flop and a Q hits the river, should you have done anything differently despite what your BB/100 says?

The important thing is to be objective in your analysis and to try to not repeat the same mistakes.

rikz · #7 09-26-2005, 07:45 PM

After you have an adequate bankroll and you are confident that you are >0 BB/100, even if it's only 3 or 4 BB/100 at NL50, move up to NL 100 at PP. I don't know why, but I've found the action there more profitable for TAG play than NL 50 PP. I may just be running good right now, but I'm starting to think that there is a general willingness to bluff more and gamble (often badly) more at NL 100 PP than at NL 50 PP.

Anybody else see that too? And I mean recently, like over the last 2 months or so.

Malachii · #8 09-26-2005, 09:03 PM

[ QUOTE ]
but I'm starting to think that there is a general willingness to bluff more and gamble (often badly) more at NL 100 PP than at NL 50 PP.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I've found 50$ NL quite tight. This is not a phenomona without precedent, limit players say that the $1/2 games on Party are tighter than the $2/4 games.