"HOURLY RATE" questions for TEXAS HOLD'EM?

Search

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
THREE PART QUESTION.........feel free to answer one, two, or all three...........


1. Any consistant profit is good............ but at what "HOURLY" PERSONALLY would you consider before moving to the next level of $10-$20?

2. Some say the amount of the BIG BLIND...........others 1.5x the BIG BLIND.........and others mention 2x the BIG BLIND is the correct way to measure a player to see if he is considered as a possible candidate to move to the next level..............WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE LISTED AS THE NORM FOR THE MASSES?

3. Furthermore, what do you believe a player the caliber of a PHIL IVEY, DOYLE BRUNSON, or JOHNNY CHAN would expect to make over the longhaul in a $5-$10 LIMIT game of hold'em?


Thanks in advance for taking the time to answer these questions.
 

Active member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
71,780
Tokens
playing your 1-2 against grannies fish is not going to cut the mustard IMO its suck out city everyhand for the bag ladies

move to NL 5-10 blinds at least you can protect your hand against suckouts
 

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
Dante said:
playing your 1-2 against grannies fish is not going to cut the mustard IMO its suck out city everyhand for the bag ladies

move to NL 5-10 blinds at least you can protect your hand against suckouts

This is STRICTLY a LIMIT hold'em question?
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
I'd probably want to be making 2.00 BB/100, BB/100 is a better measurement than hourly rate IMO
 

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
Johnny B said:
I'd probably want to be making 2.00 BB/100, BB/100 is a better measurement than hourly rate IMO

I agree, but making 2x/BB in a 5-10 game would equate to being $20 an hour.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
Fishhead said:
I agree, but making 2x/BB in a 5-10 game would equate to being $20 an hour.

Depends on how many hands you play and hour and thus how many tables you play at once.

If you're playing 1 table at a time then making $10/hr is pretty good for a 5/10 table but if you're playing 6 tables at a time then $60 or even say $40 would be considered good.

That's why I can't say "$20/hr is good." If you're playing 2 tables at once then that's good, if you're playing 8 at once it's not.

That's why everyone needs to stop thinking in terms of hourly rates and focus on BB/100, as it takes multi-tabling into account.
 

MrJ

New member
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
2,578
Tokens
That's why everyone needs to stop thinking in terms of hourly rates and focus on BB/100, as it takes multi-tabling into account.

No, hourly rate is what takes multitabling into account. BB/100 just tells you your ROI which is pretty useless unless you know your turnover. BB/100 is used to judge skill, not estimate earn potential.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
That's true, I guess I should have said it neutralizes the effect of multitabling rather than taking it into account.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
Fishhead said:
Speaking strictly LIVE games.........not ONLINE.


AHHHHHHHHH, nevermind, thought we were talking online games. Without worrying about multi-tabling I'd say 1.5 big blinds per hour.
 

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
Johnny B said:
AHHHHHHHHH, nevermind, thought we were talking online games. Without worrying about multi-tabling I'd say 1.5 big blinds per hour.

JB----You know your stuff...............therefore answer ALL three questions I poised in my opening thread.

Thanks
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
1. Any consistant profit is good............ but at what "HOURLY" PERSONALLY would you consider before moving to the next level of $10-$20?

Optimally I'd want 2 big blinds per hour, but with the tokes you have to pay live, plus a possible "bad beat jackpot" drop I'd settle for 1.5 big blinds per hour.


2. Some say the amount of the BIG BLIND...........others 1.5x the BIG BLIND.........and others mention 2x the BIG BLIND is the correct way to measure a player to see if he is considered as a possible candidate to move to the next level..............WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE LISTED AS THE NORM FOR THE MASSES?

1 big blind per hour

3. Furthermore, what do you believe a player the caliber of a PHIL IVEY, DOYLE BRUNSON, or JOHNNY CHAN would expect to make over the longhaul in a $5-$10 LIMIT game of hold'em?

Good question. I think 2.5-2.75 big blinds per hour is the upper echelon is terms of possibility, with tokes and whatnot I would say 2.5 big blinds per hour, but as low as 2 wouldn't suprise me.



EDIT: I assumed 33.33 hands per hour as I figure that's average, so my answer would differ if you were being dealt significantly more or less hands per hour. I've heard some people say they get as low as 20 hands an hour which blows my mind, with an automatic shuffler I figure you get around 35 an hour.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,781
Tokens
1. It really isn't about money, its about skill. If you are beating a game because you are lucky, going up is just a sure way to give back your profits and then some. Pay more attention to how you feel you compare to the game's players. This is much more important in live play, you can't tell shit in many online games how good a player is unless you play him a lot and take decent notes. When you feel you are ahead of the game, making better plays than most of your opponents, you are ready to go. Check your results though to make sure you aren't deluding yourself. If you think your talents are there but your medium term results don't back it, you probably aren't as good as you think.
2. Refer back #1. Two times BB is unreasonable though. Once you get to 15-30 and higher you are going to be in very select crowds if you can beat a game for more than 1.5X BB. Even beating a 15-30 game for a BB or 0.75 BB is quite good and worthy of potentially moving up. The very best regulars in the 80-160 game at the Bellagio are probably not making 1 BB an hour, but if you can make say $125/hour would you be complaining?
3. The very best players if they set their minds to it could probably get 2X BB at best from a mid-limit game. That might be awful tough to do. The skills needed to be the very best at the highest levels are not the same as the skills needed to beat mid-limit games, just the same as mid-limit games are different skills than low-limit games. Lots of players fail moving up because they don't adjust their games. The reason why you look at skills and not money won is because only when you master skills needed to win at a certain limit can you move into another limit where new skills will be required.

Note this is very specific for Las Vegas limit hold-em. California games are different in a number of ways. Haven't played a lot outside of LV, California and Washington so can't say much about others, nor do I play live no limit games much at all. California games are certainly more profitable expectation wise for dedicated players with a solid bankroll, but the fluctuations are nasty and can wipe out even good players. Bottom line is the answer for this just as for many poker related questions is "it depends".
 

New member
Joined
Sep 16, 2005
Messages
3,188
Tokens
I agree with Bill that it depends on the texture of the room and how loose your opponents play.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
595
Tokens
Johnny B said:
2. Some say the amount of the BIG BLIND...........others 1.5x the BIG BLIND.........and others mention 2x the BIG BLIND is the correct way to measure a player to see if he is considered as a possible candidate to move to the next level..............WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE LISTED AS THE NORM FOR THE MASSES?

1 big blind per hour
I disagree; I think that the masses are losing at about 1-2 BB/hr not including their share of the rake or drop. If the masses were winning I'd have to find a job.
 

Active member
Joined
Oct 20, 1999
Messages
75,444
Tokens
QuickLearner said:
I disagree; I think that the masses are losing at about 1-2 BB/hr not including their share of the rake or drop. If the masses were winning I'd have to find a job.

He meant the NORM to "advance" to the next level.
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
8,781
Tokens
So many new players don't have the perspective of time that I and some players do. Being successful for a year or two doesn't prepare you for the real long run, unless you plan on getting out soon. Being a professional player and depending on poker for your living is much harder than anyone gives credit for. I had the easiest gig a professional could ask for, being a non-moving prop for a mid limit game in California. I would show up and start playing within an hour or two and leave after my 8 hours in the room were up. Got paid $200 a day to do this. Unlike lower level props I never had to get up and go to a lesser game. Imagine getting paid good money to play poker and still not enjoying it! I still marvel at the thought, but it is true. Poker as a hobby is so much different than poker as a living. Trying to get to a point where you decide if you are ready to move up gets real serious when you play for a living. Risk has to be heeded often, even though you might know you can beat a bigger game.

Just think of it like you would a house. You can afford a bigger nicer house according to the loan officer. The agent and the loan guy want you to buy it because it is how they put money in their pockets. Your wife wants you to buy it because she constantly whines you don't have enough space. You start to think I should buy it. But what happens if you lose your job? What happens if you can't stand your job in a year? What happens if you get a pay cut? Your flexibility is gone and your risk goes way up. You will get stressed easily and bills will seem bigger than life.

Poker is just like this. The higher risk isn't just in terms of chance to go broke, it is higher risk in terms of what it can do to affect your game. Your playing style can change, you value bet less and fold too easily sometimes. Don't tell me the money doesn't matter because it ALWAYS does. The only people for who it doesn't matter are those who really don't care about money, just the challenge. Even they at some points have to think about money and where they stand.

Just the insights I can offer from a long history of playing. I don't even play that much anymore, I burned out on the game quite a bit in the past. I can tell you these sort of academic questions about bankroll and moving up turn out to be almost trivial. The real questions to ask are you really ready for it in a sort of "360 review". Can you handle the risk, can you handle the pressure, will it make your life better? Often it won't add enough until you are so far ahead of the game the move up doesn't really affect you. And that my friends is the secret to successful gambling for profit. Be ahead of the game and the stakes enough to where money and risk don't affect you much. If you have the money to play at 80-160 or below, at which do you think you will play better at regularly, 80-160 or 30-60? You can cruise through the 30-60 game with ease and play your best nearly all the time. You won't be able to do the same at 80-160.

Myself I realized that even at the good pay for propping I wasn't getting ahead enough to justify the risks and the mental battle it created. I was good enough to beat the 15-30 or 20-40 games I played, but I wasn't way ahead of them in skills or money. So I gave it up and went back to where the stress was less: behind a desk.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,108,592
Messages
13,452,769
Members
99,426
Latest member
bodyhealthtechofficia
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com