is 6 bb per 100 hands good profit?

is 6 bb per 100 hands good ? ( in cash game)

it is decent

Depends on the limits and quality of play. If you're doing that at the $300/$600 games it's amazing and you should quit your job and play poker for a living (if you haven't already). If it's at 1c/2c, it's not that great, but not horrible. Basically, just know that if you're over 0, you're better than 90% of the people playing (I think that's the right percentage). It depends on the limits you're playing, and if you're playing online whether or not you are multi-tabling.

So at 5c/10c that means 60 cents per 100 hands? That doesn't sound right.

Lemme try and have a winning night + check my stats. 60 cents doesn't sound right.

Basically what zach said - it depends on the stakes. Regardless what stakes you're at it's definitely not a bad winrate, but again like zach said if you're at 5nl or something then you could definitely squeak out more.

No, BB = Big Bets = 2*Big Blind. At 5c/10c that's $1.20 every 100 hands.

Unless you go into the preferneces tab and tick the checkbox below the "select limits" section that says "for NL/PL treat BB as Big Blind Amt.*"

That's irrelevant though, BB usually means Big Bets, not Big Blinds. Whether you adjust your settings in PT to tell you that BB means Big Blinds doesn't change anything.

Yea but it changes your actual $$ calculations and can have misleading stats if you have it set to BIg Bets not Big Blinds for NL. As in Big Bet mode it would show a winrate of 6BB/100 while your actual Big Blind per 100 is 12BB/100. It is only rellevant in this case as in NL why would we calculate our winrate in amounts twice the Big Blind(Big Bets) when we very rarely bet that small amount. Whilst using Big Bets makes sense for limit as it is the bet size for the last two rounds of betting.

I think strictly speaking...

bb = Big Blinds
BB = Big Bets

I'm as guilty as anyone of switching them, though.

Friggin Genius! How come ive never heard of this before lol would have saved me alot of confusion.

I sure ain't a pro. You can tell because I sit at the 5c/10c tables and well, I can't get Poker Tracker to work .

Okie-dokie, if multi-tabling would put a big dent in my averages, I think I better stick to one table at a time. Anyway, $2 doubled at a 5c/10c table is 20 bb right? I do that in about 50 hands often less. So 100 hands would be 40bb or 20BB yeah?

I don't think anybody would be happy just having over 0. It's small consolation. So 6 bb only sounds really low because I don't think someone playing at higher stakes would need to ask the question. My suggestion is to try and push it up to 10 bb or BB(whichever the OP is referring to).

I can't help more because what I do only works at UB and in microstakes at small tables (6 or less), and not everyone can play well at those. I'm not great at it but I hold my own.

10BB (20bb)/100 is generally the accepted highest sustainable win rate online in NL.

i would think at the micros, 6max, one could sustain better but i'm not sure. definitely for anything beyond 100NL i agree

This depends on IMO, a number of things...

a) As mentioned the limits you play
b) The amount of hands you play per hour, and amount of tables you play because it's easier to play more hands spread over multi tables.
c) How much profit you deem to be decent.

If you check the 3 boxes above, and you are making enough "profit" that allows your bankroll to keep moving onwards and upwards, then I would say yes, it can be way enough to be deemed decent.

To be simply profiting is better than the large majority of players, so well done to you, gl at the tables in the future..

no1yidmax

i agree its ok.. nothing special... you gotta get morre involved

If it is 6BB/100 it's good, 6bb/100 is even ok. How is "getting more involved" the solution to a higher win rate?

Micros 6 max for sure. My big problem has been with the occasional losing streak and going tilty during those brief times. That's why I started the 3 strikes and I'm out thing.

Don't forget though. It's UB and 5c/10c. My stats should drop a level up. Game should be tighter and so wins + BB's would drop. But not by much. The games don't look particularly tight until they're in the multiple dollars for the blinds. I don't know why. I'm just trying to roll with the punches and keep up.

I have to wait till I finish regrowing my BR. I didn't start over from scratch but I was sliding there fast. One bad night, that's all it takes. Just one bad night. That's why I'm saying on average. Because I have way more good nights than bad. I want to get it to at least $200 b4 testing the water a bit at the next level up. I know I can get to $100 from around $34 in one really good week. So I think maybe a month or two oughta do it, cuz I don't get or expect good weeks all the time .

after 20k hands at 1c/2c i was running at 10BB(20bb)/100 so it is sustainable.

after 2k hands at 5c/10c im running at 7.5BB(15bb)/100 and im playing only a slightly adjusted game. So even a small jump in stakes my winrate has been largely efeected.

Note: Both those are FR and ive been 12 tabling

Did I read that right Munchrs? Your bb/100 ratio is from 12 tabling at each level? All FR?

Now I know that when I play FR as opposed to 6 max it takes me a lot longer to double up(hence my penchant for 6 max). But I play single tables. Hmm, maybe that has a lot to do with it. Dunno.

Play a couple thousand hands. I guarantee you can not keep up 20 BB/100 hands at 5c/10c FR. There are probably sessions when you win that, but then the downswings cut into it a lot. A session of only breaking even cuts into your win rate, but when you're winning negative money and taking time, that kills your win rate. I don't see how you could average $2 per table per half hour at 5c/10c. If you can sustain that you are very good.

thats bad, because in 4159 Hands at I am averaging 17BB(34bb)/100. This means it gets worse from here.

Mind you its been great positive variance. I have had AA 21 Times and not lost once yet !!

I think I got Poker Tracker to work! But I don't know how. I'm perplexed to the extreme. I'll try making a new hand histories directory and see if I did it right.

I'd love to know my real stats instead of having to guess so much.

1) I am playing microstakes 0,01-0,02 cents,,,,,,

2) 4 tabling ( 9 player sit and goes)

3) After reading some advice at the forum I have tried to get my game better by getting profit in BB and SB......

The last week the main profit come from bb and the button


My goel I think is sustainable is to have among 20 BB ( it is read Big Bets on the pokeroffice) per 100 hands.. Who I have gotten the last week after getting profit from BB and in zero in the SB

I am going to play this level until I am playing as good as possible....

The most profit have I made being tight aggressive - neutral

The next question is how many hands before you can consider your earnrate to be sustained? In other words, how many hands before you can feel the earnrate isn't just an upswing.

30k hands would be a good sample size to determine if your winrate is sustainable.

To put that figure in perspective.. People often report playing 4.5K hands in a day multi-tabling.

man, this thread reminds me how much easier the games used to be

it's really not, to be honest. 30k hands is usually a decent sample for figuring out if you're likely a winning player or a losing player at a limit, but not something to accurately base your winrate off of. to get even close to knowing your winrate, i think you'd probably want 100k hands minimum, 200k would be much better though. since a lot of players move up in limits before they've even played that many, and since the games are constantly changing, having a grasp on your "true" bb/100 at any given time is pretty tough to do imo

a lot of great players have had 30k (and larger) breakeven stretches when it's clearly not indicative of their winrate

bottom line is you should always assume your bb/100, whatever it is, can be improved, that you can improve your game, but if you're steadily winning money over tens of thousands of hands that's pretty good

20K hands is not a meaningful sample size by a long shot. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head, but if you want even 95% confidence after 20K hands @ 10BB, your true winrate will be somewhere between 1BB and 19BB or something.

Combuboom you never let me down with your insite. I couldnt agree more with what is said here and would really like to pick your brain sometime.