Achievable winrate for micro NL

    • Cagey
      Joined: 05.07.2011 Posts: 99
      is it possible to get a far higher bb/100 whilst playing these micro stakes? how many hands does it take to realise that you are not just running good? I've been reading posts with people saying anything over 10 is not achievable but am wondering if its different for micros? I played 30000 hands at NL2 running at 17bb/100, currently playing NL6 and its similar. I'm trying to brace myself for when i just suddenly stop making money...
  • 5 replies
    • esuohdla
      Joined: 08.05.2011 Posts: 411
      Running at 22 over 25k hands, so 20ish is doable. Are you sure the posts you read didnt state it as ptbb/100? Since 10ptbb/100 is 20bb.
    • Wriggers
      Joined: 21.07.2009 Posts: 3,250
      At the micros you can get an extremely high winrate imo, at Stars NL5 I was running at just under 20bb/100 over 35k hands and I feel that is sustainable as it's so easy to get value from your strong made hands :)
    • pzhon
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      I'm rather skeptical. That you might run at 20 bb/100 for 25k or 35k hands does not mean that win rate is sustainable. Perhaps it is, but it is more likely that your long-term win rate is lower but you had some good luck.

      If your standard deviation per 100 hands (reported by some tracking software) is 90 big blinds, then a rough 95% confidence interval for your win rate after n hands is your observed win rate +- 1900/squareroot(n). For example, after 10k hands, that would be your observed win rate +- 18 bb/100. This means it is not a big surprise to run above or below your long term win rate by up to 18 bb/100 over the next 10k hands, or to be running 18 buy-ins above or below par. After 25k hands, that confidence interval is +- 11.4 bb/100. Running at 22 bb/100 for 25k hands means you have strong (but not bulletproof) statistical evidence that a long-term win rate of at least 22-11.4 ~11 bb/100 is possible.

      There are a few complications. If you ask 1000 people, 50 out of 1000 should be outside the 95% confidence interval, and 25 would be in the lucky direction. Players who have been lucky are more likely to respond to questions about what win rates are achievable than players who are unlucky. It is more likely that at some point you will look back and recognize a very lucky or very unlucky streak than that it will occur on your next 10k hands. On the other hand, players with high win rates tend to move up, so that it is very hard to find anyone with a high win rate over a large sample even if it is possible.

      Anyway, if you play with a $0.02 big blind and take poker seriously while many of your opponents push random buttons, you can get a very high win rate. However, as you move up you very quickly encounter much tougher games with many multitablers who might not play well, but who are splitting the dead money from the casual players. Many players study poker for a long time without achieving 10 bb/100 at NL $25.
    • philhellmutt
      Joined: 16.02.2011 Posts: 225
      In 2NL and 5NL, these 20bb+/100 winrates are sustainable IMO. I've been running at 13bb/100 over 60K hands this year, with 50K hands in 2NL and 5NL). And I'm well below EV, with a bad run from March-May. And I was a 7/5 uber nit until June, playing a VERY limited fit and fold game.

      Since becoming a better player (July onwards), I'm running at about 18bb/100 over 20K hands and still below EV (should be at 23bb/100). And I haven't been lucky with sets either, the last 5K hands my Flop set% is only a ridiculous 5.6%.

      I've also read that while you always want a good sample size, things tend to converge quickly in 2NL - player tendencies and your WR.

      10NL and above, I honestly don't know what is a really good sustainable WR, and I'm well aware the above winrates will NOT be something I can achieve.

      I have no doubt 20bb+/100 is totally achieavble at 2NL and perhaps 5NL. I've seen the guys at the Crush Online Holdem site getting well over 30ptbb/100 over 5K hands! This is a tight, super aggressive style.
    • esuohdla
      Joined: 08.05.2011 Posts: 411
      Depends on game selection aswell, even at 2NL I find tables full of 8/6 multitabling nits sometimes, at those or similar tables you would never sustain a WR that large, it really relies on finding the maniacs and abusing them for all their worth :P