Printable View
I was just wondering if theres any particular reason behind the general rule that more than 3bb/100 hands and you're running extremely good (and it won't last).
Is there a mathematical reasoning for this or does it just come from the combined experience of lots and lots of very good poker players? Also, does it account for some "tilty"/less than optimum play or just assume near-perfect poker?
Thanks
Jib
Its from combined experience of lots and lots of very good poker players.
And it assumes near perfect poker, but we're only human.
From the stats I've seen on the upper 10-15% of the high stakes players (200NL+), most of the players that can beat 1000NL can beat 200NL and 400NL averaging 8bb+/100 in 6max NL games.
3BB/100 is a general rule for Limit games.
Id imagine its pretty low for limit since bad players tend to play much more correctly. This is partly because there are fewer decisions to make (i.e. no bet sizing) and also because a fishes natural tendancies (i.e. call too much) line up alot nicer with correct play in limit than they do in no limit since the pot odds are so much bigger. If the worst players play almost correctly then your edge is going to be very small.
Id imagine its pretty impossible to make a mathematical proof of your maximum winrate since it is still a function of how bad the competition is.
Indeed, it's variable because your profit comes not from money you win, but money your opponents lose.
Are you talking about limit or no-limit? Big blinds or Poker Tracker big blinds? What kind of sample size?
Fixed limit and I mean big bets as opposed to big blinds
Thanks for the informative replies as usual :)
Maybe you are :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by euphoricism
online FL6 max im lucky to maintaine 4/100 live 2-4 im easly over 10bb/100. This games average vpip is probly 75-85 %
at 2-5nl ive won about 3600~ 6 months 2 sess per week say 192 hours at 40h/ph
This is something every new limit player needs to understand. Very nice thoughts Pelion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelion