E
edgie212
Rock Star
Silver Level
Well, ideally as much as humanly possible, but in a more realistic bent you shouldn't be playing just one table...playing multiple tables is a big variance reducer and much less boring. There's alwas some action on some corner of your screen(or in my case, screens) and minimizes tilt due to boredom.
I am more conservative than most, so unless I am at an incredibly soft table, if I double up(in your case, $50 to $100), I leave. Say you are spreading four sessions on your screen. If you double up on one of your screens and are showing a modest loss or gain on your other three, that's a good session in my opinion. Unless you run really bad (KK v AA, quads against your boat, straight river spike, etc), variance will treat you better the more sessions you play.
I am more conservative than most, so unless I am at an incredibly soft table, if I double up(in your case, $50 to $100), I leave. Say you are spreading four sessions on your screen. If you double up on one of your screens and are showing a modest loss or gain on your other three, that's a good session in my opinion. Unless you run really bad (KK v AA, quads against your boat, straight river spike, etc), variance will treat you better the more sessions you play.
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Setting a target for winnings is quite possibly the worst idea ever.
naruto_miu
Legend
Silver Level
Just curious why would that be a bad Idea? I mean, If you don't set Targets for Winning then how can one really move on up? I'm not a rings/cash man at all, but just saying......If my target is say 100 per-day, or 3k per-month then wouldn't setting goals be really a smart Idea?
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
Because that goal is based upon random chance. And failing or meeting that goal will affect your mood, make you play worse/better (most likely worse).
Good goals for poker are ones that are not dependent on how the cards fall. My favorites are:
1) Play 20,000 hands this month.
2) Keep all my sessions this month shorter than 90 minutes.
3) Have only 3 time-out related errors all month.
4) Post 3 hands where I get all in on the flop this month.
If you set a goal to win $1000 this month, you could possibly play horribly and meet that goal. Or you could play awesome and miss it. You really want to avoid being results oriented playing cards, and a goal like this is a great way to become results oriented.
I don't mind setting goals that are very long term (say, finance a wsop entry fee with money I've won from online MTT's). Just as long as they're general, and involve a long span of results.
If you're trying to decide if you should move up or not, you should evaluate your long term results, and get some opinions from people who play at that stake level whether your game is good enough.
Good goals for poker are ones that are not dependent on how the cards fall. My favorites are:
1) Play 20,000 hands this month.
2) Keep all my sessions this month shorter than 90 minutes.
3) Have only 3 time-out related errors all month.
4) Post 3 hands where I get all in on the flop this month.
If you set a goal to win $1000 this month, you could possibly play horribly and meet that goal. Or you could play awesome and miss it. You really want to avoid being results oriented playing cards, and a goal like this is a great way to become results oriented.
I don't mind setting goals that are very long term (say, finance a wsop entry fee with money I've won from online MTT's). Just as long as they're general, and involve a long span of results.
If you're trying to decide if you should move up or not, you should evaluate your long term results, and get some opinions from people who play at that stake level whether your game is good enough.
S
Skaplun
Rock Star
Silver Level
the lab man
CardsChat Irregular
Silver Level
Thank you
c9h13no3
Is drawing with AK
Silver Level
90 minute sessions. However, that number is pretty arbitrary. Everyone has different stress tolerances. But its quite common for your longest sessions to be the ones where you lose the most, because after a certain period of time, you tilt in order to deal with the stress of bad beats, losing, ect. Even winning for a prolonged period of time can put you on tilt (winner's tilt anyone?). So its typically a good rule to keep your sessions short.
A time out error is when your time runs out, and your hand is declared dead. Some people try to multi-table too much, and this error costs them some monies.
B
Boomswitch
Rock Star
Silver Level
Hit and run is so very bad... I wouldn't recommend this at all. If you are at a soft table, don't leave just because you doubled up. If the players are weak then keep playing as long as you can. Only leave when your session is over after a pre-determined # of hands, or when you are not playing your best, due to physical factors (fatigue, distractions, etc) or mental factors (tilt, stress, anger, etc).
W
WillySmackYoAss
Rock Star
Silver Level
I think he's saying he plays longer if the table is soft, otherwise a double up is his cue to leave. I don't agree with hit and running like this either, because it's more about playing quality hours. But it's much more tolerable in an online game versus a live game.
forsakenone
Legend
Silver Level
I used to hit and run, until i started asking me how in the world do i keep seeing people with 4-5 buyins at a table, so i said the hell with it, i won't leave anymore, every now and then there are times when i am the one making 4-5 buyins at 1 tables due too many fish, often fish tilting because i took a buyin from them.
as for hourly rate the aim should always be: play better poker, better than the day before.
as for hourly rate the aim should always be: play better poker, better than the day before.
bullishwwd
Legend
Loyaler
I really like your answer here...makes a lot of sense. However, your "signature" makes no sense. Wally
joeaugie
Enthusiast
Silver Level
To answer the original question:
50NL with a winrate of 2.5ptBB/100 long term and a volume of say 80 hands/hour would yield approximately $2/hour for each table.
However, setting volume goals are fine because you can control that outcome. Setting monetary goals in the short term is bad, because you can't control how the cards fall.
Poker is totally volatile. Some of the best high stakes players have logged 100K-150K break-even stretches and have beat the game for 2-3ptBB/100 over 1 million hands.
Top level SNG players have an ROI of 10% over 20K tournaments, yet can break-even for 1K tournaments.
All you have to do is take a careful look at sharkscope leaderboard graphs.
It may appear to be a straight ascending line, but if you look closer you'll find looooooong stretches of SNGs where no money was made.
The same holds true for cash games. Different formats....but variance nontheless. Don't fool yourself into thinking (Oh well in cash games I just get it in good so it won't be as bad.) Then set over set, flushes and straights get beat by trips when board pairs, full house runs into quads, aces all-in preflop gets beat multiple times in a row, etc.
The players who succeed keep their head down, manage their BRs well, and never worry about outcomes. It takes a TON of patience. In fact, I think that is 75% of poker....a test of patience when you keep getting pummeled in the face.
Variance is a greater beast than most people realize until they hit it head on, which is why setting monetary goals is pointless.
50NL with a winrate of 2.5ptBB/100 long term and a volume of say 80 hands/hour would yield approximately $2/hour for each table.
However, setting volume goals are fine because you can control that outcome. Setting monetary goals in the short term is bad, because you can't control how the cards fall.
Poker is totally volatile. Some of the best high stakes players have logged 100K-150K break-even stretches and have beat the game for 2-3ptBB/100 over 1 million hands.
Top level SNG players have an ROI of 10% over 20K tournaments, yet can break-even for 1K tournaments.
All you have to do is take a careful look at sharkscope leaderboard graphs.
It may appear to be a straight ascending line, but if you look closer you'll find looooooong stretches of SNGs where no money was made.
The same holds true for cash games. Different formats....but variance nontheless. Don't fool yourself into thinking (Oh well in cash games I just get it in good so it won't be as bad.) Then set over set, flushes and straights get beat by trips when board pairs, full house runs into quads, aces all-in preflop gets beat multiple times in a row, etc.
The players who succeed keep their head down, manage their BRs well, and never worry about outcomes. It takes a TON of patience. In fact, I think that is 75% of poker....a test of patience when you keep getting pummeled in the face.
Variance is a greater beast than most people realize until they hit it head on, which is why setting monetary goals is pointless.