Winrate decrease from 5/10 => 10/20

[beachbum]

Assume a 5/10 SH player who plays at a skill level to beat the game at 1.5 BB/100. He is fairly game selective now and will be as he moves up.

What is Hero's expected winrate EV at 10/20, once he is comfortable with the amount of money involved? Winrates in and of themselves are meaningless, but if Hero can beat the 5/10 at a skill level of 1.5 BB/100, what should he beat the 10/20 for? Just wondering how much tougher it is, quantitatively.

[Lmn55d]

it's really going to be impossible for anyone to tell you this or even give you a reasonable estimate for a few reasons.

1) Very few people know their winrate at a high confidence level. I have played over 100K hands at each of those limits and my winrate at each could be within a fairly wide range.

2) Assuming you get better over time, your true winrate when you stop playing 5/10 will be higher than what PT tells you. Likewise, if I looked at my current winrate at 10/20 it would be higher than my winrate at the time I immediately started playing 10/20.

3) Some players happen to play a game that is more adapted to the higher aggression of 10/20. For example, maybe a player calls down too liberally in 5/10 and tries to induce bluffs too much. It is possible that this player will have greater success at 10/20.

FWIW, my winrate at 10/20 after 110k hands is almost exactly the same as it was at 5/10 after 140k.

[TMFS9]

I didn't experience any decrease (and actually had a higher winrate at 10/20), but again sample size, etc, etc. I personally didn't find the games much tougher just maybe a few more tags. One thing to note though is the fact that the rake has a less drastic imact on 10/20 versus the 5/10 so that might help offset any loss in your edge. So i would say maybe close to the same or around 1.35-1.40 BB/100.

[aba20]

Don't worry about it. I used to be obsessed with win rates and then I realized, after 200K+ hands, that there is so much short term variance that this question is almost meaningless. I have run at 5 BB/100 at 10/20 for 10K hands and then -5 BB/100 for the next 10K. How tough you think the game is when moving up is how well you run in your first 25K hands you play. If you run badly you will say that it is extremely difficult and if you run well you will say the opposite. So just play your best game and forget about BB/100 it is a bad measure of performance.

[beachbum]

Yeah I hear ya, aba. Check the sticky thread and my contribution about winrates [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].

The term 'winrate' is probably the wrong term to use. I'm basically using it to represent a player's skill level, or longterm EV given a particular situation. If you're sitting at a table with 3 loose-passives that are awful postflop, a LAG who is a complete unthinking gambler, and another TAG, your expected winrate EV might be around 3 BB/100 if you're sharp and focused. However, replace one of the loose-passives with a rock, now your table EV might be 2.5/100.

This is the idea I'm getting at. Using winrates is the wrong word, but I was just trying to get a grasp numerically on the difference between the 5/10 and 10/20 SH Party limits.

[stigmata]

I think if you carry on working on your game and improving, and exercise good table selection, your theoretical winrate should remain fairly similar, what with the decreased rake too. Certainly my winrate at 5/10 and 10/20 is pretty similar. However, if I moved down to 5/10 again (which I still do sometimes) I feel I could now beat it for a lot more than I was.

[MrBig30]

FWIW my winrates over about 70K 5/10 and 80K 10/20 are very similar. If I had to GUESS I would say about 0.5-1BB/100 is what you lose depending on how well you adapt to somewhat increased aggression.

[Nietzsche]

You can play more tables at 5/10 without taking too much of a hit in win rate because the players are more predictable than at 10/20. This is another factor to take into account.