For Money or Love?

USGrant · #1 02-23-2005, 01:58 AM

Reading the many win-rate posts in this forum makes me wonder if .5/1 NL isn't a complete waste of time. My numbers may be wrong, but it takes roughy 160 hours to log in 10,000 hands. If a player has a win rate of 5BB/100 (2+2 consensus seems to support this as a very strong WR), s/he will have to spend an average of 5.5 hours daily each month to net $250 playing 1 table. Multi-table x2 = $500, x3 = $750, etc. $250/160 = $1.56 an hour...$500/160 = $3.12/hour...$750/160 = $6.24/hour. What does McDonald's pay an hour these days?

What am I missing, besides the obvious that if you want to make a good dime you have to up the stakes? I'm pretty sure I can play at or near 5BB/100 at the .5/1 NL tables. So where would that put me at the 1/2 NL tables where the competition is gnarlier?

I wonder if my time would be better spent at night doing some freelance writing work that I know would pay $30-$40 an hour guaranteed. If I weren't a poker addict in denial it would be an easy decision.

Again, what am I missing here?

waffle · #2 02-23-2005, 04:06 AM

Lower stakes means lower winrates, but also smaller swings, smaller bankroll requirements, and generally lesser skilled players. If there is a certain value you set upon your time, and the stakes you play are not worth the opportunity cost you give up when you could be doing something else, why would you play? Two reasons I can think of.

1. Your bankroll, skills, risk tolerance, or any combination of these are not sufficient for playing the tables with stakes that you require. You are 'paying your dues' at the lower stakes tables, growing your bankroll and learning how to play better, with the expectation of your hourly rate increasing after putting in the work that is required.

2. Money is not your primary goal in playing poker.

USGrant · #3 02-23-2005, 09:25 AM

Thanks...if I had to answer my own post, that's probably what I would have written, although prob. not as well.

I guess my post should have been: how do you maintain a healthy relationship with both a woman and your poker game?

pzhon · #4 02-23-2005, 01:47 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Reading the many win-rate posts in this forum makes me wonder if .5/1 NL isn't a complete waste of time. My numbers may be wrong, but it takes roughy 160 hours to log in 10,000 hands. If a player has a win rate of 5BB/100 (2+2 consensus seems to support this as a very strong WR),

[/ QUOTE ]
No, that is a poor win rate for $0.50-$1 NL. 5 big bets/100 is a reasonable win rate for $0.50-$1 limit. For low-stakes NL, people have reported rates of 15-35 big blinds/100.

USGrant · #5 02-23-2005, 04:05 PM

I guess that's the eternal debate, i.e. what a viable win-rate is at .5/1. I see many back and forth discussions on the matter. If I can achieve something close to 10 then it might be worth the effort if multi-tabling.

aflaba · #6 02-23-2005, 04:11 PM

Yo play there to be able to make more money in the future.

It's an education

Blackjack · #7 02-23-2005, 05:24 PM

Whoever said expect lower winrates at lower levels of NL is a doofus. At lower levels of NL, you will find shittier players, thus increasing your BB/100. But at higher levels, your BB/100 will be less because of the increasingly skill of the opposition but your actually earn rate might be more because of the value of the BB at higher stakes.

Blackjack

granny50 · #8 02-23-2005, 05:56 PM

This post is ridiculous. I do not play poker for love, I play it for the money. I have paid off several debts including college loans and I did this multitabling 25NL and 50NL at party poker and occasionally cashing big in a tourney. I would still say that I could average $15-$18/hr playing 4 tables of 50NL. I haven't played my usual 100NL for 3 weeks now because I am switching to playing 5/10 6 max limit. But when I did play 100NL, I sustained a winrate of about $30/hr for 4 months and about 70K hands. Much better than working at McDs

waffle · #9 02-23-2005, 08:42 PM

I meant lower winrates in terms of dollars, not BB. Good thing you posted -- the original poster might have gotten confused and thought high stakes gamers were significantly easier than low stakes games.

USGrant · #10 02-23-2005, 10:10 PM

Yeah, the point is, no matter what your BB/100 is, it all matters what you can average per hour. If you're 21 years old and have 50 hours of spare time on your hands each week, then hell, play poker and earn some money. I'm really interested if it's a worthwhile part-time gig after my day job, or if I shouldn't even bother. I wonder about all the 2+2ers and poker addicts and their personal lives...i.e., how do you log in 10,000+ hands in a month and still have a relationship(s) with someone other than your mouse pad? Whatever, I'll find out either way. Thanks for the postings.