Are my numbers good enough to move up?

[Cocco_Bill]

Since I don't use Pokertracker (yet) this is about the best set of data I have for my winning rate so far. A new feature on Prima let me see that I have played 14267 raked hands over the last 40 days.

During this period I have played exclusively 4 tables 50NL (blinds 0.25/0.5) and cashed out 17920kr about $2600. A raked hand is defined as any hand I was dealt cards in and was raked for at least 25c. Im not sure what percentage gets raked for 25c, but lets just assume I played 20000 hands.

That that would make it 5200BB/20000 or 26BB/100 hands in earnings.

I really don't have anything to compare to for evaluation of how good/bad this is. Is the sample size big enough? What do the best players make? How many BB/100 should I make before moving up the limits. Any advice would be welcome

[ensign_lee]

You can move up. :P

And the $.50 $1 NL tables are still pretty soft. It's when you move up to $1 $2 NL tables that there's a noticaeble difference. $2600...holy crap. That's about how much I made at $1 $2 NL at Party............you must be a helluva player to extract that much money out of smaller stacks.

[ilikeaces86]

Move up dawg pretty soon youll be pimpin NL1000

[Cocco_Bill]

You can move up. :P

And the $.50 $1 NL tables are still pretty soft. It's when you move up to $1 $2 NL tables that there's a noticaeble difference. $2600...holy crap. That's about how much I made at $1 $2 NL at Party............you must be a helluva player to extract that much money out of smaller stacks.

I'm not even sure I would make a profit playing 1-2NL as the 50NL tables are ridiculously soft on Prima, even more so than on party. I did take a stint at the .5-1 tables a few months ago, making about $1200 in my first week and a half of play after which I ran into the worst downswing of my short poker playing career and lost about 800$ of it. I bounced back a bit and then decided to play mostly the lower tables again while slowly making the change from playing 2 tables to 4 tables.

I think I have learned a lot since then, so maybe its time to give the higher tables a new shot.

[Cocco_Bill]

Move up dawg pretty soon youll be pimpin NL1000

Boy, thats a long long way off.. Talk about playing with scared money..

[ensign_lee]

I started off on Prima too. $.10 $.25 blinds, then $.25 $.50 blinds. I stayed there for a while, then moved up to $.50 $1 blinds where I stayed for a good 2-3 months.

Tried to move up again, hit a good streak, won a little bit....and then promptly lost something like 1/3 of my bankroll.

So I moved back down, tried to gain some confidence back, lost some more, and then deposited on Party. Haven't really been back all that much since. I played at RoyalVegas, and it seems like all the fish are gone off that site now...

Anyway, kudos to you and as a simple answer to your question, yes; you can move up now. ;o)

[ensign_lee]

Move up dawg pretty soon youll be pimpin NL1000

Boy, thats a long long way off.. Talk about playing with scared money..

Man, I tried to jump up to $400 NL...THAT was scared money. and I STILL lost.
KK vs JJ. JJ hits a set...whoops.

But when I hit a set, life was good. full house, 9's full of kings vs the other guy's trip kings, ace kicker.

[jmontis]

curious, what's your basic play style? you try to trap people with better hands? Make people fold to big bets?

[a500lbgorilla]

I'm impressed, Bill. I thought you fell off the face of the poker Earth becuase of that AA KK run. (I don't remember the exact details, but you kept losing with your big hands.)

50 NL plays exactly like 100 NL. I still see way more bad players than I do good players. As long as you don't play like scared money, you'll be fine.

-'rilla

[wobbler]

That that would make it 5200BB/20000 or 26BB/100 hands in earnings.

um...wouldn't that be 13BB/100 ?
according to Poker-Tracker:
BB = Big Bet = 2 x Big Blind = $1 at NL 0.25-0.5
so $2600 = 2600 BB which gives 2600BB/20000 = 13 BB/100 hands

this stuff still confuses me, but I think I got it right this time

[JeffreyGB]

That that would make it 5200BB/20000 or 26BB/100 hands in earnings.

um...wouldn't that be 13BB/100 ?
according to Poker-Tracker:
BB = Big Bet = 2 x Big Blind = $1 at NL 0.25-0.5
so $2600 = 2600 BB which gives 2600BB/20000 = 13 BB/100 hands

this stuff still confuses me, but I think I got it right this time

That looks right. And yes, 13 BB/100 is a good win rate. Anything above 5 BB/100 is good as far as I'm concerned. Looks like you've got the BR and the experience, so move up! Enjoy!

- Jeffrey

[Cocco_Bill]

I'm impressed, Bill. I thought you fell off the face of the poker Earth becuase of that AA KK run. (I don't remember the exact details, but you kept losing with your big hands.)

50 NL plays exactly like 100 NL. I still see way more bad players than I do good players. As long as you don't play like scared money, you'll be fine.

-'rilla

Hehe, although that was a hellish run I was never actually genuinely losing. I had already withdrawn every single deposited $ from PP and had made thousands in winnings from other sites.I did manage to play down a PP bankroll of 1400$ down to something like 300$ at one point. That seperate 300$ has now grown up to more than 2000$ mostly from party skin bonus whoring alone. I've started using Neteller now so I won't be needing 3 seperate bankrolls anymore

[Cocco_Bill]

That that would make it 5200BB/20000 or 26BB/100 hands in earnings.

um...wouldn't that be 13BB/100 ?
according to Poker-Tracker:
BB = Big Bet = 2 x Big Blind = $1 at NL 0.25-0.5
so $2600 = 2600 BB which gives 2600BB/20000 = 13 BB/100 hands

this stuff still confuses me, but I think I got it right this time

I always thought when people were talking in terms of BB/100 that BB=Big Blind. guess I was wrong..

[ensign_lee]

I'm pretty sure BB meant Big Blind. Am I missing something?

[JeffreyGB]

I'm pretty sure BB meant Big Blind. Am I missing something?

BB/100 = Big Bets per 100 hands

1 Big Bet = 2x big blind

The terminology comes from limit but the value is the same in NL.