BB/100

[77dave]

How many hands at any stakes online do you need to play to gain a balanced view on your bb/100 rate

playing 0.5/1  1/2 and 2/4 plo  what bb/100 rates do you need to be either:

 a survivor living of rakeback

doing well beating the game

ready to move to the next level

[jgcblack]

How many hands at any stakes online do you need to play to gain a balanced view on your bb/100 rate

playing 0.5/1  1/2 and 2/4 plo  what bb/100 rates do you need to be either:

 a survivor living of rakeback

doing well beating the game

ready to move to the next level

in before lil'dave....

dave?           (also change title to BB/100 PLO)

[JustinSayne]

I would say 200k hands is a decent enough sample for you to look at your bb/100.

Survivor:

Depends on your rakeback deal. Back in the Ipoker days of 60%+ deals, you could grind 100k hands a month and make $5k+ from rakeback as a break even player.

Doing well:

I would say anything from 2-5bb/100 is doing well

Time to move up:

If your bank roll allows it, as a established 3bb/100+ winner you should be able to move up


Also as mentioned above, this is going by bb/100 not BB/100.

[77dave]

Are you talking nlh rather than plo. That seems like a lot of hands per month.

im looking at playing 25k hands p/m

[NEWY]

How many tables and how many hours would u need to play to get in the volume u talk about? What is the average number of hands played an hour NLH and PLO?

[JustinSayne]

To give you a idea of the 'variance' you can expect as a 2bb/100 winner over 25k hands

Click to see full-size image.

Each line represents what your graph would look like in terms of profit/loss.

Note the black dotted line is what a true 2bb/100 winrate would actually look like.

So what you can take away from this is that over such a small sample, its extremely easy for you to think your much better/worse than you actually are.

This is why you need large samples for your true winrate to actually converge.

Using half a million hands we get this graph

Click to see full-size image.

Ok, they are not sticking entirely to the true winrate, but the general trend for each of them is upwards. Unlike our previous image. Where you could have the illusion of being a huge crusher/fish over such a short sample

[rfgqqabc]

SD even correct for plo, surely its like 200?

[JustinSayne]

Just used 80 as a rough guess. I am not familiar with PLO to know what it would be

[rfgqqabc]

Just used 80 as a rough guess. I am not familiar with PLO to know what it would be

I believe its about 200 for 6max plo, think 80 for Hold'em is about right.

I think 100k hands would be too small a sample for much more than a good level of confidence. I.e, 10bb/100 for 100k hands indicates a likely winner but easily could be from 2-12bb/100

a 3bb/100 winner might be from -3-9bb/100.

P.s, this is all from forum posts i have read, it is probably close to truth but certainly not fact, search on 2+2 for answers maybe.

[SuuPRlim]

I think bb/100 is a pretty useless statistic for the most part, personally.

[smashedagain]

I think bb/100 is a pretty useless statistic for the most part, personally.

yeah but you equate success into how many beer tokens is it.

[SuuPRlim]

I think bb/100 is a pretty useless statistic for the most part, personally.

yeah but you equate success into how many beer tokens is it.

1BT/100 is all i want, play 100 hands, get a beer, play another 100, what more you want really??