My understanding of hourly win rate in NL cash games leads me to believe that a winning play should be able to earn 10 PTBB per 100 hands. For example, If I should be able to earn $10 per hundred hands at a .25/.50 blind game.

My question is this.. Is this hourly win rate expectation based on typical 100 bet max buy in games and if so what would my hourly win rate be at a sight like Absolute poker where they let you buy in for 200 bets? I would imagine my win rate should double given the bigger edge in the game when you can buy in for that many bets.

Any thoughts?

I think a normal win/rate is something like 50ptbb/100, and pretty much anyone who reads a poker book should be able to make a solid living off playing poker, bringing in $30-40k/month. If you don't feel like reading you could just look at a few Celebrity Poker Showdown episodes and you'll pick up enough strategy.





Well maybe no 100% true. I'll make some adjustments to that.

10pt/bb is an incredibly high win/rate. Half of that is good. Moving up to double blinds level will not double your profits because in general, your opponents are going to be tougher. You may not even be a winning player at your new level.

Anyone "expecting" a 10ptbb/100 win rate without a good combination of experience, knowledge, talent or table selection will be disappointed. Feel free to do a search for Alameda Mike.

Either my game has gone to hell lately or 10PTBBs is no longer possible right now at anything above $100NL (and maybe not even there).

Ive never seen the games this tough.

I ran at over 8 PTBB at Absolute playing 200 BB stacks some of the time (1/2 NL 6-max)). That was over 15K hands or so IIRC, so not really enough to be highly reliable. However, I think the deeper stacks benefits the good player for sure. Obviously it would vary, but I would guess a 25% increase in winrate if I had to say.
Keep in mind your stack is only effectively 200BB if your opponents have 200BB too.

In the past 6 weeks Im around 4PTBBs at $200 and $400 NL. Ive played some $1000 NL at a very high rate but no where enough hands for it to mean anything.

Over the past 25,000 hands or so i'm running at 7.5 PTBB/100 playing 6-8 tables of NL200 6max, for what that's worth.

I don't think it's impossible that much better players can sustain a higher winrate over a longer period of time.

I saw a screenshot on 2p2 of Dan Bright's PT stats as he'd recently dropped to playing 1/2 NL for some reason, he had about 20k hands running at just under 20 PTBB/100. Sure he's on a heater but even a third of that winrate is impressive (i assume he 8 tables aswell).

I think 10PTBB/100 is absolutely crushing the game. As a rule of thumb if you are good enough to be winning at that rate or higher you should be playing at least the next level up.

I maintained about 9PTBB/100 at $50 NL FR. Realistically I'm having issues getting above about 3PTBB/100 at 6 max ($100 or $200) - but I have only been playing 6 max for a few months