What are good winrates from the BB and SB?

What is considered good for win rates from the BB and SB positions? I understand that the win rate will still be negative. I've heard -30bb/100 is a good win rate from the BB, but is it achievable?


If you just fold the BB all the time, your win rate is going to be close to -100 bb/100, so you have to get involved and defend your blinds. But you are almost always out of position with marginal hands. How do people manage to create a good (but still minus) win rate?

johnnythemoss said:

What is considered good for win rates from the BB and SB positions? I understand that the win rate will still be negative. I've heard -30bb/100 is a good win rate from the BB, but is it achievable?


If you just fold the BB all the time, your win rate is going to be close to -100 bb/100, so you have to get involved and defend your blinds. But you are almost always out of position with marginal hands. How do people manage to create a good (but still minus) win rate?

Click to expand...

Pretty sure it is even possible playing the blinds positive on the lowest levels with enough table selection.
But these winrates depend on so many factors, that you can't really compare them. Analyzing games/ populations is a skill in itself and altering results for specific samples is also not hard. Let's say im a full timegrinder and we're to make a sample of like all the weekends over 1 Year. I would supose that graph would look pretty sick. I'm not saying claims of sick winrates are all BS, but you got be aware that a winrate from 2005 on fulltilt can't be compared to partypoker FF today.

As for playing the Blinds. Ranges. If you play better ranges than your opponent, you will win against him in the longrun assuming your skill postflop is equal. And there is loads of free content out there. Study blind play for like 2 weeks and you will get a pretty good idea of what to do.
If you now also have a edge postflop, you can actually loosen up your game and thus generating more EV. BB defend has the problem that it has to play OOP and is forced to pay, but also has an odds advantage, so it can defend wider and therefore usually has an advantage in boardcovarege.
Even if you were to assume that you never had any foldequity postflop becuase V is a IP station, you would still have your raw handequity wich is quite a lot. But in fact, the people that you face in the micros have no clue what they are doing. So you have pretty decent foldequity depending on the game. And if not = Valuetown.

Most people's game is 1 entire big leak. So it's about fixing ones own and finding other's.

LevySystem said:

Pretty sure it is even possible playing the blinds positive on the lowest levels with enough table selection.

But in fact, the people that you face in the micros have no clue what they are doing.

Click to expand...

I've never heard of anyone showing a + winrate from the BB at any level over a large sample in cash games. What are you basing this claim on?

johnnythemoss said:

I've never heard of anyone showing a + winrate from the BB at any level over a large sample in cash games. What are you basing this claim on?

Click to expand...

My last nl2 zoom sample:
https://gyazo.com/48ed505173de788513dcb0c9effbf838


Keep in mind this is without any tableselection and in a fast format, thus the edges are thinner.

Your sample shows a negative winrate of -27/bb from the BB. It's certainly a decent winrate but it's hardly the same as saying a positive winrate is achieveable.

johnnythemoss said:

Your sample shows a negative winrate of -27/bb from the BB. It's certainly a decent winrate but it's hardly the same as saying a positive winrate is achieveable.

Click to expand...

You don't see the big picture. This is a sample vs a pool of 700-1.3k people depending on the time played. The reads I had were based on colered markers at best, and roughly 50 people I had a relevant hudsample on. Plus I am not even claiming to be a good player. +20bb winrate on Nl2 zoom should be doable for any good nl100 zoom regular over say 100k sample. If we were to talk about true winrates that's a different story. But if you take blackrain as an example you can see what can be done if you focus on exploting fish. Why do you think LinusLove has a 17% 3betrange?
It's about edge. The bigger the edge the bigger the winrate.

If you read this General or Fundiver would you please post a nice regtables sample? I don't have any for reg tables. You could also ask the pros on CC, but I doubt they played micros lately

As said, let's say I'm a grinder that plays like 10k hand sessions. Take the weekends, 3 days, by 52 that's like a 1.5 Mio hand sample of literally the most +EV days of the year. I would actually wonder what that graph would look compared to the other 5 mio sample.

So if I was to play vs drunk Asians on an App, sure, prolly printing +20bb from all pos.

LevySystem said:

But if you take blackrain as an example you can see what can be done if you focus on exploting fish. .

Click to expand...

Blackrain's winrate from the BB is -11 bb/100, according to his blog posts and in one of his books. He claims to be the most winning player ever at the Micros and his winrate from that position is still negative. You are making claims without actually backing it up. I'm not even saying it's impossible, but if the most winning player ever at 2NL has a negative winrate, what makes you think it's so achievable? Even if it is possible, it seems like a wildly unrealistic winrate for anyone but elite players.

johnnythemoss said:

Blackrain's winrate from the BB is -11 bb/100, according to his blog posts and in one of his books. He claims to be the most winning player ever at the Micros and his winrate from that position is still negative. You are making claims without actually backing it up. I'm not even saying it's impossible, but if the most winning player ever at 2NL has a negative winrate, what makes you think it's so achievable? Even if it is possible, it seems like a wildly unrealistic winrate for anyone but elite players.

Click to expand...

Without any disrespect to blackrain, but if you let any good professional cashgameplayer play a relevant sample on those stakes, with Tableselection, Hud, playing soft regular tables, etc. equivalent and better results can be achieved. Wich is by no means easy obviously, but it's nothing out of the line. Pretty sure if we were to ask him about his nicest 100k hands he could show us positive bbs.

But as said, this entire Diskussion is kinda pointless, cause winrates are just dependent on so many factors that comparing them is nearly impossible.

Reading trough your posting history makes me think you need to change your general approach to the game, if I may give you this advice.

GL at the tables

Sure, I'm always open to getting advice.

johnnythemoss said:

I've heard -30bb/100 is a good win rate from the BB, but is it achievable?

How do people manage to create a good (but still minus) win rate?

Click to expand...

I hadn't payed much attention to win rates in the blinds as much as what particular plays I was making overall and my overall win rate.

I have 104k hands in my DB over the following stakes:
2 NL - 6,560 Hands
5 NL - 2,901 Hands
10 NL - 18,157 Hands
30 NL - 55,812 Hands
50 NL - 1,977 Hands
50 NL (FR) - 14 Hands
100 NL - 18,017 Hands
200 NL - 670 Hands
500 NL - 80 Hands

Here are my overall rates from the blinds:
BB : 20,319 Hands : -18.34 BB / 100
SB : 20,399 Hands : -27.20 BB / 100

I do not claim to be any sort of pro or crusher and only really started to play online cash games at the end of March after COVID shut down the live games in casinos. If 100k hands is enough of a sample for your question I think this shows -30 BB / 100 should be attainable from the blinds. Especially for pros, grinders, and the many players much better than me.

There is a rule. -50/100 from the blinds. You must achieve this. But this is only a rule. Rough one...
If there is an ante, this will be easier. You know, the BB have the worst position postflop, but the best preflop. Because of this, if the ante is huge, you are good, the field is weak, it is possible to have positive win rate from the blinds.
Sometime the SB is 0.4, not 0.5. If the field is weak, you can be BE at the SB or even with positive win rate.

-35bb is pretty normal for the BB, -15bb for a SB. In a "normal" situation. You still can be a crusher .
For the good win rate from the blinds (negative) you can do a lot of things. You can call more. In some situations. You can call less in others. Also the 3bet, squeeze. With depolarized range. You can exploit some people with polarized. If you use HUD...But this is a pretty huge topic. Like 1/3 from "the poker". I can't even give you some valuable advice. There are a lot of things.

And also, for a full ring cash table, this rule "-50/100 from the blinds" is not usable. You will lost a lot from the blinds. But there are 9 people, not 6...You will pay rare. The fee...I mean you have seven "free hands", you already paid for this. At 6 max you have only four. "A lot", I mean this rule must be "-60/100" or "-65/100", I can't tell, someone else maybe can.

And also, this coaches. Don't listen to them. This is just an advertisement. And looks so funny in the eyes of the experienced player. To have a good win rate at the blinds at micros, you must use many "borderline" hands. And they are a lot. With very little profit. And this is a waste of time. Some "weaker" player will have better $/hour. This sh*t is only for "advertisement".

c0rnBr34d said:

If 100k hands is enough of a sample for your question I think this shows -30 BB / 100 should be attainable from the blinds. Especially for pros, grinders, and the many players much better than me.

Click to expand...

And what is your general strategy of playing from the big blind? i.e. calling steals wide with a lot of suited cards, check-raising draws+value, etc. Is that too general?

You are asking him "how to play poker".

One of the most popular coaches for the micros is talking for wide range for check-raise. Personally I don't like that. I talked to him and he can't give a good answer for my questions.
I can tell why wide range for check-raise is bad. The main argument for check-raise is because the people have wide range from the the late positions and "maybe" wide range for Cbet OTF.
1. The people "maybe" have wide range for BTN, but I don't think we can't tell that for the CO.
2. If you expect wide range for bet, why you use a value range for check-raise!? This is a lost of value.
3. What is your plan for the turn and the river!? Bet OTT, shove OTR!? As bluff!? At the micros!?
4. If you try to use balanced range for check-raise, there are just not enough value hands to support this wide range for check-raise. And your calling range becomes weaker.
5. They "maybe" have a wide range for Cbet OTF, but they "for sure" will expect a lot of bluffs from the blinds.

Check-raise as default is very bad imo. Also you pay a huge rake at micros. Try to avoid big pots without a monster hand. You can use that only if the HUD "tells" you. As bluff. At least bluff heavy range for check-raise. Against the suitable persons. Yes, you can use that without HUD. But pretty rare. Let's say, the guy is from Ukraine or Belarus, some board with low cards, no FD possible. Something like this. Very rare. Some of the tips that you learned. But this so rare, can't affect your win rate. Doesn't matter, this "check-raise strategy" is not usable.

The main weapons are "resteal", "wide calling range" and the HUD. My advice is to have depolarized range for resteal. As default...Not a wide one. Without info. Wide calling range, but not too wide. Vs 3x use narrow range. When you call, just play as fish. Like stupid passive fish. That's it. You have a pair, draw, then call. He check-back, you miss your gutshot, then bluff with small size. OTT you call only if you expect to beat some of his hands for value. Bluffs as well, draws. If you have pot ods to call. Obv pot odds. OTR you call only if you expect many bluffs or if you have a strong hand (can beat some of his hands for bet there). Pot odds..That's it. Play like stupid fish, don't play aggro very often. The passive play is your main plan. No shame in that. There is a guy, heads up crusher, one million for a year. He tells that. "I call with an ugly hands OOP, because I have pot odds. I didn't do anything special, I just played like stupid fish. For the pot odds".

johnnythemoss said:

And what is your general strategy of playing from the big blind? i.e. calling steals wide with a lot of suited cards, check-raising draws+value, etc. Is that too general?

Click to expand...

This is a super broad question. I'd say it's like you play any other position in poker. Depending on the action in front of you there are a wide range of options. If there is a raise or a 3 bet or it folds around or there's one or more limps you will want to do different things. Also, obviously if it's an early position raise or a late position raise, and if it's a tight vs loose player. How strong our own range is, what our table image might be... In general I do NOT call steals wide with any range of cards. I would rather 3 bet light wider against someone who is raising wide or in late position. Calling from the blinds is not really defending since you'll be OOP playing a capped range for the rest of the hand. It will be difficult to do this profitably unless your opponent is weak post flop or you run really good.

As with any position you'll be mostly folding. But when you do want to continue from the blinds it should often be with a raise. As mentioned above, playing OOP with a marginal hand vs an uncapped range is not what we should want to be doing more of.

I will show a pic with some ranges and then explanation. I have a little work now...A suitable ranges for the micros. NL2-NL25...NL50 against weak field (some small rooms).

Ok, I am bored enough, I will show some examples. As text...Those ranges are narrow, "tight". Suitable for players with an "average" skills. If you are good, you can call more. If you are weak, you must call less. If you play at NL25 or/and if you have a good rakeback, you must call more hands.

Vs UTG/MP 3x 44-QQ, AQo, ATs-AQs, KQs, JTs.
Vs UTG/MP 2.5x 22-TT, AJo, A2s-A5s, A9s, ATs, KQo, KTs-KQs, QTs, QJs, JTs, T9s, 98s
Vs UTG/MP 2x 22-99, A9o, ATo, KJo, KTo, QTo, QJo, JTo, 65s+, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, 86s+

Vs CO 3x 44+, Axs+, ATo, KJo, QJo, K9s+, Q9s+, J9s+65s+
Vs CO 2.5x 44+, Axs+, ATo, A9o, KJo, KTo, QJo, QTo, JTo, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, 65s+, 86s+
Vs CO 2x 22+, Axs+, A2o-A5o, ATo, A9o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o, K2s+, Q2s+, J6s+, T6s+, 96s+, 54s+, 64s+

Vs BTN 3x 44+, Axs+, ATo, A9o, KJo, KTo, QJo, QTo, JTo, K6s+, Q8s+, J8s+, 65s+, 86s+
Vs BTN 2.5x 44+, Axs+, A2o-A5o, ATo, A9o, K9o+, Q9o+, J9o+, T9o, K2s+, Q2s+, J6s+, T6s+, 96s+, 54s+, 64s+
Vs BTN 2x 22+, Ax, K6o+, Q8o+, J8o+, T8o+, 98o+, K2s+, Q2s+, J2s+, T6s+, 96s+, 54s+, 64s+

This is for BB. From SB we are play mainly with 3bet. Still at the lowest limits you can call with some very good hands. But not as default...As default at NL2, let's say pocket pairs vs early postions, JTs, KQs, AQo, something like that. But your main plan is "3bet or fold". From the SB...

For the 3bet I used depolarized range, as I said. As default, without info. Very rare I play without "any" info, but whatever, we will talk about this. I think KQ is pretty good hand for resteal, AJ as well. TT....99 is little weaker, but it is suitable for SB. Kjs, JTs, QJs is good for SB. Pretty narrow range, as you see. But with info you can add many hands. Garbage as well...But for squeeze don't do that. Mainly with depolarized range, very rare with weak hands. Almost never...Vs SB you can go crazy...