The mathematically correct way is to collect stats on your play, calculate average win rate....
To make a long story short it can take about 100,000 or so hands to be 95% sure you're a winner, more if you are close to a break even player and less if you are a strong winner. Or maybe about 2000 SNG's. Basically its alot, like a 1000 hours of play...
ROI (return on investment) solves both problems. If we do not have a +ROI, we are not increasing our bankroll so we should not be moving up. All the stats in the world end up in the our ROI result. Stats can tell help us determine where we may need to improve, but ROI is key.
If you play a single table. Many players multi table.100,000 online hands at 75 hands an hour is 1500 hrs of play which is about 30 hrs a week for a year. 2000 SNG's is 5.5 per day for a year. This sounds like a lot to me. And in the end, simply playing a lot of poker for one year tells us very little. You are right that our stats will have meaning after this amount of time.
No problem. So is mine. Not trying to pick at you just clarifying what I'm saying.Just one mans opinion of course.
Good luck and God bless.
Once we exceed 100 big blinds and we can control the losses so that we continue to have cash in case of losing the money we were betting and not losing everything.
The mathematically correct way is to collect stats on your play, calculate average win rate, standard deviation and standard error etc. From that you can put a statistical confidence interval on whatever your true win rate is.
To make a long story short it can take about 100,000 or so hands to be 95% sure you're a winner, more if you are close to a break even player and less if you are a strong winner. Or maybe about 2000 SNG's. Basically its alot, like a 1000 hours of play.
If you don't have the patience you can use a bankroll management strategy, i.e. go up when your bankroll goes up enough to justify playing at higher levels. That way you get practise in a tougher game too. If you really are able to win at a higher level why spend a 1000 hours using stats to show you beat a lower level, right? Just be prepared for downswings don't bankrupt yourself getting over confident.
When a player suffers low on the bank is it because he played poorly or is it just the variance? anyway the bank will suffer the decline so it will not be able to rise to the right level?I think bankroll management is the answer. If you target 50 buyins for a tournament, then that is the best way to tell you what level you should be playing. If cash game, then numbers are different, but the idea is the same. You should 'earn' your way up the ladder.
100,000 online hands at 75 hands an hour is 1500 hrs of play which is about 30 hrs a week for a year. 2000 SNG's is 5.5 per day for a year. This sounds like a lot to me. And in the end, simply playing a lot of poker for one year tells us very little. You are right that our stats will have meaning after this amount of time.
ROI (return on investment) solves both problems. If we do not have a +ROI, we are not increasing our bankroll so we should not be moving up. All the stats in the world end up in the our ROI result. Stats can tell help us determine where we may need to improve, but ROI is key.
Just one mans opinion of course.
Good luck and God bless.
You can tell, because the oponents become easy for you relatively. However watch out going up. I know pros who are unbeatable at 3-6 go up to 5.10 and not be able to win. Some players dont have the mindset to play at a higher level even though they are great poker players. For instance the pro who taught me has trouble at higher levels,because he sweats the action. I do better than him at those levels because I dont worry about the amounts. I just play the chips, Though I admit , he is still a much better poker player than me.