|
|
#11
09-19-2005, 11:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60?
Just a suggestion: perhaps you would get better results by PMing the people that you want to know about. For what should be obvious reasons, people might be reluctant to publicise their win rates on a forum. No?
|
|
#12
09-19-2005, 11:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60?
[ QUOTE ]
The purpose of my post is only to understand where I am compared to other respected 2+2ers. [/ QUOTE ] I would say that I don't think there are many people who are pulling more than 1.5BB/100 out of that game ... so, if you can keep up that rate, you should count yourself in a very elite group. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com 1.x/100 in that game, where x < 5 ... and < 1 ... and he has a horribly small sample size, so this stat is even less meaningful [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
|
#13
09-19-2005, 12:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60?
1.5 is a very solid WR in that game. I would guess the best players with good decent table selection can make a little over two, and the ones with great table selection can do 2.5 or even a little more. Those are just ballpark guestimates however, and they could be skewed by the fact that i am currently running very well in the 30 game.
|
|
#14
09-19-2005, 04:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60
Even over a 100k hand sample, this is just a "who's running the best?" contest. Seriously - don't get yourself wrapped up in this sort of thing. It won't give you an indication of how you size up against anybody really.
-James
|
|
#17
09-19-2005, 08:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
you need 700,000 hands to really know anything
"Even over a 100k hand sample, this is just a "who's running the best?" contest"
ding ding ding, WE HAVE A WINNER! and medium stakes has turned into a "who's running good will now give out advice" forum. 700k hands and then you can step up to the plate and say you earn x/100 with confidence. live players go f*ck yourselves, youll never know for sure if youre great. and online come back when youre reaching around 500k-700k until then shut up with your "well im taking 3.7 bb/100 out of stars 2-4" crap.
|
|
#19
09-19-2005, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60?
[ QUOTE ]
"25k hands." lmfao [/ QUOTE ] 25,000 is obviously far too little ... but I think you might be fine analyzing with a number less than your noted 500K-700K. But it's obviously FAR closer to 500K than 25K. More hands = more gooder* analysis. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com * Don't judge me.
|
|
#20
09-19-2005, 08:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: now that we\'ve had some time, whats a solid WR for the Party 30/60
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "25k hands." lmfao [/ QUOTE ] 25,000 is obviously far too little ... but I think you might be fine analyzing with a number less than your noted 500K-700K. But it's obviously FAR closer to 500K than 25K. More hands = more gooder* analysis. Barron Vangor Toth BarronVangorToth.com * Don't judge me. [/ QUOTE ] Far closer? 200 is closer to 25 than to 500. 300 is 75 closer to 500 than it is to 25. What qualifies as "Far closer"? 400k? 450k? If it's the 100k-200k that most people say, it's closer to 25k than 500k. Maybe FAR closer. Hate to be a nit, but when people capitalize words, I TAKE IT SERIOUSLY.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
