Common question: One Big Bet an Hour?

[mchilger]

I receive a lot of questions about one big bet an hour and there have also been many posts about this same topic. Let me give some of my thoughts on this subject...

One big bet an hour has been the benchmark qouted by many people and authors as a very good earn rate for live games. Of course, this will vary depending on the limits you play as the games generally become tougher the higher you go in limits. I believe I remember David Sklansky saying that one big blind an hour is very difficult to achieve once you get to limits above $30-$60.

In my book, I use the standard one big bet an hour as a benchmark also for Internet games and I still believe this is a good benchmark. An advanced player could earn more than that but one big bet an hour is a good goal for most players at all limits. If you consistently earn one big bet an hour at a given limit then you can consider moving up limits with an adequate bankroll making this another reason it is a good benchmark.

But I hear of people making a lot more than this?...

First, you need to be sure we are comparing apples to apples. You can earn more than this playing two tables at a time, playing short-handed, or playing no-limit. One BB/Hour is for typical full ring games.

But I have heard people earn a lot more in full ring games?...

Another thing that skews earn rates is how many hours one has played.
Even over 500 to 1000 hours, players can record exceptional earn rates...some of that can be due to good play but also some of that is due to good cards. Short-term luck can impact your earn rate a lot so you really need at least a few thousand hours of stats before your actual earn rate starts to come close with your expected earn rate. Because of this, you'll often hear players bragging about their great earn rates but you'll often find that in six months or a year this player isn't bragging quite as much.

As an example of short-term results, when I was playing full-time, I was playing 250 to 300 total hours a month (including multi-table) and recorded wins for 11 straight months. My earn rate looked fantastic. I thought I was THE Master of poker. Then all of a sudden I got slammed and had a losing month. That one month put my earn rate back into perspective.

But how can you compare live game earn rates to Internet earn rates when you play a lot more hands on the Internet? If you can earn 1 big bet an hour in a live game and play twice as many hands on the Internet, can't you earn twice as much?

First, how much of the earn rate of an advanced player in a live game is due to his ability to read his opponents. For example, let's say he earns one big bet an hour...how much does he save or earn by noticing tells from his opponents? By noticing opportunities to steal pots when opponents bet out of turn, etcetera. I don't know the answer to this question but it at least represents some percentage of his earn rate that is not available online.

Second, this argument assumes the level of play is equal between online and live games and I don't think this is always the case. Looking at the Internet about 15 months ago, high limit games of $15-$30 and higher were much tougher on the Internet than in live games. Back in the old days before Party Poker became so big...Paradise, Party, and Poker Stars generally had tight tough games. Yes there were fish, but generally only 20% to 30% of the players saw the flop. Compare this to live games where a much higher percentage of the players see the flop.

This has changed recently however. Party Poker is much looser than it used to be with the tremendous growth in Internet Poker over the last year. There are a lot more players. Earn rates have definitely increased over the last year. Today, if I were to compare the Party $15-$30 game to the $15-$30 and $20-$40 games in Las Vegas and Tunica, I would say the flop percentages are a lot closer and Internet games much more aggressive post-flop.

However, looking at the Poker Stars $30-$60 game compared to this same limit in Vegas and Tunica, the Poker Stars game is much tougher. You cannot earn the same amount per hand at this limit.

Comparing lower limits is difficult as live games don't have micro limits but a lot of players have commented that they think the $2-$4 Internet games compare to the $4-$8 live games.

To summarize, yes, maybe it is possible to earn more than the "standard" earn rate qouted for live games, but I don't think it is a lot more.

OK, but there are a lot of weak players in the games I play in. I think I can earn double or triple the normal rate with so many weak players....

Let's look at a scenario. There is your typical game...now replace two average players in the game with two weak players who should lose one big bet an hour. In a $2-$4 game, they should then lose $8 an hour between the two of them. Divide this between the remaining eight players and each player would earn $1 extra. If you were earning one big bet an hour before, now you expect to earn 1.25 big bets an hour. A small increase, but it doesn't double your earn rate or anything like that.

To summarize...the one big bet an hour for live games has generally been qouted for "advanced" or "expert" players. I think this is still a good benchmark for most players to shoot for on the Internet. If you are making this much, you can consider moving up limits with an adequate bankroll. If you are not making this much then you need to work out some leaks in your game. Advanced or "expert" players do earn more than the standard one big bet an hour in full ring games on the Internet...How much more is a debate that could only be answered by some of people who have access to a site's database.

Matthew

[fred]

I'm a little confused.

If you are playing Hold em $1/$2, are you saying you should only earn $4 an hour? ($2 x 2)

What if you are playing $25 NL at Party. The blinds are .25/.50. How much should a good player expect to earn here?

Thanks

[geormiet]

1 big bet per hour at 1/2 = $2 an hour.

Can't help you with NL - I don't know.

[Bugsbunny]

1 BB/hr online (for 1 table) may be a little low, but not much. If you get 60 hands/hour that's equivalent to about 1.6 BB/100. If you get 70 hands/hr it's about 1.4 BB/100.

A target for a good player is normally 2 BB/100, which is about 1.2 BB/hr at 60 hands/hr and 1.4 BB/hr at 70 hands an hour.

Rates above 3 BB/100 are generally considered unsustainable, and anyone earning that much is way too good for that level. 2 BB/100 is generally considered to be crushing the game.

3 BB/100 is equivalent to 1.8 BB/hr at 60 hands an hour and 2.1 BB/hr at 70 hands an hour.

So I would say that 1 BB/hr is decent, 1.5 BB/hr is outstanding. Anything more than that and you're pushing the limits of what's achievable by mere mortals.

[mchilger]

Fred, at $1-$2 you should earn $2 (.50 small blind and $1 blind). At $2-$4 you should earn $4. Realize this is what "most" players should aim for. Anything consistently higher than this and you are ready for higher limits.

Matthew

[RiverCascade]

Gosh I hate to post dumb questions, however

Just when I thought I had finally been able to separate big bets from big blinds due to your book arriving-- checking the glossary, big bet is "the amount of the bet on the last 2 rounds of betting." Which told me the big bet changed every round according to all money bet in the last 2 rounds. Not that that helped me figure out big bets (bcz is the round the round bet by all the payers around the table one time, or is a round say, once-all money bet after the flop, no matter how many times around, and then second is all the money bet after the turn, no matter how many times around), but it sure differentiated it from big blind. (Can you believe someone can be this new????)

Reading what you've written above my post here, I'm back to my usual state: totally confused.

RC

[mchilger]

River, I guess a better definition would be "The amount you can bet at any one time on the turn or river." If you are playing $3-$6, the big bet is $6.

Matthew

[RiverCascade]

Oh!.... YAY!.... happy happy

[banditdad]

Here's what I don't understand. I belong to another forum where they consistently talk about winning 3,4, or 5 BB/100 over 5K-10K hands. And that you shouldn't even think of moving up until you reach these numbers.

So I have 2 questions

1. Are these guys blowing smoke?
2. Do you look at hands played or hours played?
2a) How many hours should I play before moving up?

[mborte]

Anybody who has done significant reading of respected poker books has seen 1-2 BB/Hour as the goal/expected win rate of expert players. Of course, these are expectations for a brick and mortar game which is dealt at a rate of approxiamtely 30 hands/hour. It stands to reason that since the online game is dealt at twice that rate, that you could expect to win twice as much (2-4 BB/hour). It is also logical to presume that since you may play 2 tables at once you could earn twice this amount (4-8 BB/hour). While this is logical, it is not realistic in the long-term for a number of reasons.

I agree with Mathew in that you need to play thousands of hours to truly know what your earn rate is. Until you go through some serious cycels (both good and bad), you will have skewed numbers. I have won 30 of my last 36 sessions and I am averaging 8 BB/hour over this time period. This simply is not sustainable for thousands of hours. I also agree that your earn rate may be higher in lower limit games where there are less experienced players (as a general rule).

All this said, I beleive a quality player can earn more than 1 BB/hour online...particularly if they are playing in lower limit games and two tables at a time. The pure speed of the game is the single largest contributor to these higher win rates.

[mchilger]

Mborte, welcome to the Forum.

Bandit, sorry but missed your earlier July post. Some answers to your questions.

1/ 5,000 to 10,000 hands can have skewed results either way. That is a about one month of play full-time. I have had months where I've won 500 big bets and months where I've lost 250. If I post my stats after the 500 big bet month they are going to be skewed.

You also must compare apples to apples. I always give stats per table. If someone is playing 2,3, or 4 tables they can obviously have much higher numbers per hour.

One big bet an hour is a good goal for most players. Can you earn more? Definitely. Advanced players will earn more and experts even more. How much more...I'm not sure. I haven't played $2-$4 for thousands of hours to know how much more I could earn at lower limits than the higher limits. But one big bet an hour is a good rate and shows you are ready to move up to a new limit.

Another problem I have with these earn rates. If you are earning 2 or more big bets an hour, it is time to move up (this assumes you put your earnings back into your bankroll). You are obviously an advanced player and the level of play does not drop that much from limit to limit online up to $15-$30. I would rather earn 1.5 BB's an hour at $5-$10 then 2 BB's at $2-$4.

2/ I've always looked at an hourly rate but many prefer the earning per hand. My only problem with this is that some games are faster than other. I prefer to know how much I am making an hour. For example, short handed vs full ring games. You get way more hands in per hour increasing your hourly rate.

3/ I think it is more a reflection of your bankroll and comfort level, especially at the lower limits of $1-$2 to $3-$6. You are not going to find a major difference in quality of play so I think your can move up whenever you feel ready as long as you have the bankroll. I suggest that player's should prove they can earn 100 big bets at each limit before going up...as long as they are ready to move down limits if things start to go south.

Final thoughts, a couple of years ago Internet play was tougher than live games. So I don't think you can simply say that since you are dealt twice as many hands you should make twice as much. There are other variables involved but nowadays it is probably a pretty good assumption.

Matthew

[RiverCascade]

Matthew (I'm not going to call you the Professor any more since I heard on the WSOP they call Howard L. that-- have to find a new, better nick-- do you have one, yet?),

You say, "If you are earning 2 or more big bets an hour, it is time to move up (this assumes you put your earnings back into your bankroll). "

Now, I know you say here and elsewhere, once we earn 100-150BB, together w/proper br for moving up we can do so, so in light of the quote above, how long making 2BB an hour, together w/proper-sized br, would you say qualifies us to move up? (It can't be 100BB worth or it'd be the same original qualifier. Am I making sense?)

Thanks,
RC

[mchilger]

Well if you play 50 hours and earn 2 big bets an hour and have the bankroll, I don't see why you couldn't move up as long as you are ready to drop down if things start to go sour. Obviously the 50 hours does not mean you are a long-term winning player but maybe you are and can move up as long as you will move back down.

My comment in the previous post was really for those who say they earn 2-4 big bets an hour over a 500 - 1000 hour period at a particular limit. Wow, that's fantastic...but why would you want to do that? Move up a limit where you can make even more money. (I'm assuming low limits as I don't think it's possible to earn much more than 2 big bets an hour at the higher limits consistently for the long-term).

There have been a lot of questions about bankroll on this Forum. My book is meant to be a guideline. If you've read the chapter and understand what you are facing they you know the risk. From there each player can decide how much risk they want to take. Just remember, if you take more risk and move up limits quickly you need to be ready to move down quickly also to protect your bankroll.

I started out playing $20-$40, lol. I was an experienced NL player but had no Limit experience. I was lucky that I didn't run into a bad run early in the game or I may have given up. Fortunately, I won a lot starting out and then was smart enough to realize that I needed to keep improving my play. By the time I had a bankroll to actually play $20- $40 I had also developed the skills to do so. Of course, I did it the wrong way as I learned about the fluctuations later. My stat class actually came to some use, . I could have easily gone broke.

For most players it should be a nice steady rise...whether is is 250, 300, or 350 big bets is up to you. Whether you feel you need to play a certain number of hours at each limit is up to you.

I got a little off-topic here but just want to make clear to everybody that the most important thing is to have a bankroll plan. What kind of plan really depends on how risk averse you are.

Matthew

[XtremePlay]

There is also another important thing: RAKE.
If I play 3/6 fulltable I pay rake $11/100hand. And I make 1.5BB/100hand so that sums up to $20/100 (if there were no rake).

Let say I go and play 15/30 now. Instead of $20/100 I would make $100 (assumptions: i play as good as 3/6). That is also withoutthe rake. At 15/30 normal rake pay is $20/100 (About, i measured this). So, thrully I make about $80/100 hand which is 2.67BB/100 hand which is as you say outstanding.
So we go from 1.5 -> 2.67 whit the exact same play. Important concept. Thats all. I hope some day will lower the rake at lower limits cause it is killing us. It is also unfair.

[mchilger]

I continue to get questions about this topic and had another thought about the guideline of 1 big bet an hour. I think everyone would be surprised to know how many players actually earn 1 big bet an hour. I don't know the actual percentage of players but I am sure it it very low. Just think about it, how many decent players are sitting at your table on average when you are playing? Maybe 2-3 and that number doesn't reflect the true percentage since the good players play long-term and the poor players go broke.

A lot more players lose at this game then win at it and a much smaller percentage are able to clear 1 big bet an hour. Again, very good players and experts earn more but 1 big bet an hour is a good benchmark for most players to strive for.

Matthew