Good morning,
I have read a lot of articles about being a winning player over a certain sample size all with different opinions. What do you guys think? How many hands would you say you need to play at a level to say you are beating it? I should imagine this has a varied outcome dependent on whether you play micro/low/medium/high stakes etc.
I ask because I am currently playing NL16 with a winrate of ~15bb/100 over a small sample of 10,000 hands. I don't think this is enough hands to declare myself as a winning player yet, but it means I am doing something right. I now have 30 BI's for NL25 but feel I have not established myself at NL16 yet, I feel I would be better off playing another 10,000-20,000 hands at NL16 to get a better grasp of where I am at, this will only take me a couple of weeks to achieve.
Any advice will be appreciated...
T4NK