At what win rate at 5/10 do you think one would make more at 10/20?

[aflaba]

In general: At what win rate at 5/10 do you think one would do more $ when moving up to 10/20?

A break-even player at 5/10 would most often lose on 10/20?

A 3BB/100 hands player would most often win more money at 10/20?

Where do you think the breaking point is where it is profitable to move up?

[pr0crastin8r]

3BB/100 over what sample size? A if you're at 3BB over 40k hands, you should surely move up. You're crushing the game. If you're at 3BB over 5k hands, that doesn't really mean anything. Hell, if you're 2BB/100 over 40k hands you should move up. How sure are you of your win rate?

[STLantny]

heh, hes speaking hypothetically.

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
heh, hes speaking hypothetically.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah, exactly... He's talking "true WR". B/c for example, when you say "if your 2 BB/100 after 40k hands", with the variance in SH play, being at this WR, really only means that you're very likely between even and 4 BB/100 (in terms of TRUE WR).

I would be interested in what people think about this "in theory" though. I would have to think that it would depend on not only your WR, but also your style of play... as some people are probaby more suited to handle the overly LAGy type that you'll see at 10/20, whereas some people might have higher WRs at 5/10, but just not be able to adjust their play as well.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
3BB/100 over what sample size? A if you're at 3BB over 40k hands, you should surely move up. You're crushing the game. If you're at 3BB over 5k hands, that doesn't really mean anything. Hell, if you're 2BB/100 over 40k hands you should move up. How sure are you of your win rate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with like this entire statement

[Trix]

Less than twice the 10/20 winrate ?

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3BB/100 over what sample size? A if you're at 3BB over 40k hands, you should surely move up. You're crushing the game. If you're at 3BB over 5k hands, that doesn't really mean anything. Hell, if you're 2BB/100 over 40k hands you should move up. How sure are you of your win rate?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I disagree with like this entire statement


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with like this entire opinion of that statement

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
Less than twice the 10/20 winrate ?

[/ QUOTE ]

good thinking.

[aflaba]

Yeah, clever :-)
But when do you think that is?

[pfkaok]

I've been playing a pretty good amount of 5/10 the past few months, and from what I've heard the game is much tougher now than it was a while ago (more 2 +2ers multitabling probably one of the biggest causes). I don't have a ton of 10/20 experience, but from what I have seen there, and from all the hands I've datamined at that level, I hvae to think that if you understand SH play well enough to beat the 5/10 for 2.5 - 3 BB/100, then you'll cerainly beat the 10/20 for a decent clip. As long as you take good notes, have a decent PT database, and can exercise good table selection, I see no reason why you can't beat 10/20 for at least half of what you beat 5/10 for... esp since the rake is much lower % at that level. However, if you are only able to beat it for half as much (probably would be the case for somebody winning 1.5-2 BB/100 at 5/10), or even slightly more than half, then I'm sure it would be better to play 5/10 b/c of the variance factor. With the increased aggro, your SD will almost certainly be higher in BB/100, so if you're winning at the same or only slightly more with swings that are over twice as big it could certinaly be a problem. Being able to play your best despite losing huge sums of money quickly isn't easy, and some people can probably never do it well, despite having bankrolls that are WAY more than sufficient.