bb/hour

[ANJBerg 0]

When playing Limit, can someone explain to me how you figure out how well you are doing. I have heard you are suppose to base it on BB/hour or hands. How do you figure this out, and what is it?Any help.

[dna4ever 2]

if you are playing $1/$2 limit then the big bet is $2. If you net $10 in an hour then you are making 5xbb (big bet) not to be confused with big blind which would be just $1 in this scenario. Don't know if this is what you were looking for or not??

[Ed 0]

Here's an additional question on that for playing online.Say you play online for 2 hours at .50/$1. You finish up $32 for the session. $16/hr., a top quality 16BB/hr.But ... you did this while 4-tabling. So you put in 8 "table" hours. For stat keeping purpose, would you count this then as $4/hour, or 4BB/hr., based on the table hours played, or would you keep it on simply the overall real-life time you spent playing?I know how to figure it both ways and all, I'm just wondering how the regular multi-tablers go about it. I've been keeping the stats both ways of late.

[dna4ever 2]

Ive only been playing limit for 2 days lol so I am hardly the guy to give the right answer to this I'm sure, but I have been counting my 4 tabling as 1 session not 4. If I depo $25 on 4 tables and end up with $15 , $25, $30, $40 at the end then I see that as 1 session where I netted $10 or 5 big bets at a $1/$2 table (not 1 losing session, 1 break even session, and 2 winning sessions)

[Suited_Up 2]

Ive only been playing limit for 2 days lol so I am hardly the guy to give the right answer to this I'm sure, but I have been counting my 4 tabling as 1 session not 4. If I depo $25 on 4 tables and end up with $15 , $25, $30, $40 at the end then I see that as 1 session where I netted $10 or 5 big bets at a $1/$2 table (not 1 losing session, 1 break even session, and 2 winning sessions)

Yeah, just add all the wins together... and multiply the BB by 4. Then divide it. I think?

[dna4ever 2]

Ive only been playing limit for 2 days lol so I am hardly the guy to give the right answer to this I'm sure, but I have been counting my 4 tabling as 1 session not 4. If I depo $25 on 4 tables and end up with $15 , $25, $30, $40 at the end then I see that as 1 session where I netted $10 or 5 big bets at a $1/$2 table (not 1 losing session, 1 break even session, and 2 winning sessions)

Yeah, just add all the wins together... and multiply the BB by 4. Then divide it. I think?

Simplest is just to take your total cash out amount minus your total depo amount. In example above cashed out $110 - $100 (starting amount 4X$25) = $10 Net Profit. Since playing a $1/$2 table the bb is $2 so Net Profit ($10) divided by BB ($2) = BB/Hour (5) [assuming you played for exactly 1 hour]

[wrto4556 0]

Here's an additional question on that for playing online.Say you play online for 2 hours at .50/$1. You finish up $32 for the session. $16/hr., a top quality 16BB/hr.But ... you did this while 4-tabling. So you put in 8 "table" hours. For stat keeping purpose, would you count this then as $4/hour, or 4BB/hr., based on the table hours played, or would you keep it on simply the overall real-life time you spent playing?I know how to figure it both ways and all, I'm just wondering how the regular multi-tablers go about it. I've been keeping the stats both ways of late.

This is such a good question. I was excited when you asked it because about 2 months ago I was wondering the same thing. I finally found out what the answer was about a week later....but I forgot, now. :? oops!I think you just calculate the bb/hr seperately by tables...like 4bb/hr at one table, 7bb/hr at the other table, etc. And then average them if you were playing the same amount of time at each table. *shrug*

[JFarrell20 1]

Here's an additional question on that for playing online.Say you play online for 2 hours at .50/$1. You finish up $32 for the session. $16/hr., a top quality 16BB/hr.But ... you did this while 4-tabling. So you put in 8 "table" hours. For stat keeping purpose, would you count this then as $4/hour, or 4BB/hr., based on the table hours played, or would you keep it on simply the overall real-life time you spent playing?I know how to figure it both ways and all, I'm just wondering how the regular multi-tablers go about it. I've been keeping the stats both ways of late.

You would call it 4BB/man-hour. In other words, you don't want to confuse yourself into thinking you did better than you actually did. Keep in mind you saw 4 times as many hands in 1 hour. I call them "man-hours"...but I hear people call them "table hours" too.

[Ed 0]

That's kind of what I was thinking would be the more preferred way of going about it. I guess BB/100 hands would work well here, too, since there's no time valuation involved.Although, it would have been more fun to say I was up 29.375 BB/hr. for my 2-hour session last night. .... I'll take the 7.34 BB/table hr. still since I was 4 tabling.Even then, it's deceiving though. At three of the tables, I either treaded water to stay a little ahead, or never got anything going and was a little down. It was only at the other table, where I tripled my buy-in, did the stats really boost.I guess the trick when 4-tabling is that I also don't necessarily stay at the same 4 tables for the full 2 hours or however long it is. I'm not very skilled short-handed, and things move so fast that if a table breaks up to where 4 or less people are getting cards (including me), I go find another one.

[maurile 0]

Say you play online for 2 hours at .50/$1. You finish up $32 for the session. $16/hr., a top quality 16BB/hr.But ... you did this while 4-tabling. So you put in 8 "table" hours. For stat keeping purpose, would you count this then as $4/hour, or 4BB/hr., based on the table hours played, or would you keep it on simply the overall real-life time you spent playing?

IMO, you should be aware of two numbers: BB/100, and $/hr.Your BB/100 (big bets per 100 hands) doesn't depend on how many tables you play. A hundred hands is a hundred hands, whether they're all at the same table or spread over four tables.Your $/hr, on the other hand, does depend on how many tables you play. If you're making 2 BB/100, that's about $2.40/hr/table in a $1/$2 game (assuming 60 hands per hour per table). If you're playing one table, that's $2.40/hr, but if you're playing four tables, that's $9.60/hr.

[UglyJimStudly 0]

But ... you did this while 4-tabling. So you put in 8 "table" hours. For stat keeping purpose, would you count this then as $4/hour, or 4BB/hr., based on the table hours played, or would you keep it on simply the overall real-life time you spent playing?

IMHO, it depends on what sort of records you're keeping. If you're just measuring income to decide how many and which tables to play, then measuring by real hours is fine. If you're trying to track leaks in your game and figure out how to improve, then measuring by table hours is more useful. Assuming you're using some kind of spreadsheet, no reason not to track both.That's for personal use, of course. For bragging rights, use whichever one sounds better.

[JFarrell20 1]

Even then, it's deceiving though. At three of the tables, I either treaded water to stay a little ahead, or never got anything going and was a little down. It was only at the other table, where I tripled my buy-in, did the stats really boost..

This doesn't matter. It's like buying a mutual fund. Several of the stocks within that fund may lose money. One of the stocks may quadruple in 6 months, meaning the overall mutual fund is making money. Don't worry about losing at 3 out of 4 tables (unless you feel the players at those 3 tables are much better than you).

[Guest]

IMO, you should be aware of two numbers: BB/100, and $/hr.Your BB/100 (big bets per 100 hands) doesn't depend on how many tables you play. A hundred hands is a hundred hands, whether they're all at the same table or spread over four tables.Your $/hr, on the other hand, does depend on how many tables you play. If you're making 2 BB/100, that's about $2.40/hr/table in a $1/$2 game (assuming 60 hands per hour per table). If you're playing one table, that's $2.40/hr, but if you're playing four tables, that's $9.60/hr.

I prefer to record my results as BB/100. I play around 200-250 hands/hr 4-tabling. In my last few sessions, I have been losing on 2 tables and winning on 2 tables. Luckily the 2 tables I have been making money on outweighs my 2 losing tables.

[UglyJimStudly 0]

Don't worry about losing at 3 out of 4 tables (unless you feel the players at those 3 tables are much better than you).

Eh, I think that's very much worth worrying about - it's important to identify the source of every leak; some can't be prevented, but many can. In this case, one thing I'd examine is whether the results improve when you only play two or three tables. It's possible that splitting attention over four games means you only win when you get really big hands (which would explain why three are break-even or worse and one is a big winner - that one got more big hands over a particular session). That will probably lead to high variation (and maybe even overall losses) in the long term, and it might be better if you can consistently beat all tables in which you only get average hands. Won't know until you keep the stats for a while to find out.

[Ed 0]

In terms of that session that I was referring to, which was last night. It was .02/.04. One table I clocked out having only been there about 15 minutes. Saw one playable hand, but it didn't hold up. That loss and a couple blinds and I left down 20 cents. Another, I took a beat with AA to 8-5 suited. And not even to a flush, but a straight. Ouch. Recovered from that and left at time's up at 94 cents. So -.26. Another table I played 2 hands too loose before realizing it was Maniac Central, and I ex-caped at -.19. So -.45 overall.Other tables, however, featured one I was up .34 when it broke, another I was up .21 when it broke. So +.55 on those makes it's +.10 overall. The third I closed at session's end, I was up .29, for +.39 overall. On the only table I was able to stay in at for all 2 hours, I finished +1.96, for a net of +2.35 overall.S0, +2.35 is equal to 58.75 BB.58.75 BB over 2 real-life hours: 29.375 BB/hr.58.75 BB over 8 table hours: 7.34 BB/hr.58.75 over 382 hands: About 0.15 BB/hand, or about 15.38 BB/100 hands.For the last 3 sessions I've played, I combined the numbers:Up $5.24 net (131 BB)Real-life hours: 6 hours, 40 minutes.$/hr.: +0.79BB/hr: 19.64Table hours: 24 hours.$/table hr: +0.22BB/Thr: +5.46Hands: 1142.BB/100 hands: +11.47The one thing I've found really effective about 4-tabling is that I don't spend any time thinking about bad beats, such as the AA v. 5-8. I'm too busy with what's going on elsewhere to worry about it in the moment, but I can go back and analyze the hand after the session and see what happened. I think this makes a big difference in my play overall.

[JFarrell20 1]

Don't worry about losing at 3 out of 4 tables (unless you feel the players at those 3 tables are much better than you).

Eh, I think that's very much worth worrying about - it's important to identify the source of every leak; some can't be prevented, but many can. In this case, one thing I'd examine is whether the results improve when you only play two or three tables. It's possible that splitting attention over four games means you only win when you get really big hands (which would explain why three are break-even or worse and one is a big winner - that one got more big hands over a particular session). That will probably lead to high variation (and maybe even overall losses) in the long term, and it might be better if you can consistently beat all tables in which you only get average hands. Won't know until you keep the stats for a while to find out.

You know what I mean...he needs to take his overall. That's like saying Daniel Negreanu failed last year in tournaments because he failed to cash in more tourneys than he cashed in. ...The ones he cashed in made up for that. What I'm saying is that ...oh nevermind. I think you know what I mean.

[MrConceit 0]

How many tables you play at does matter obviously. You want a rough estimate of how much you'd make per table. It's obviously less important if you're ALWAYS going to be doing the same number of tables, 2 or 4 or whatever. I still prefer BB/100 overall, it's easier to keep track of.But I still keep track on an excel spreadsheet every table. And I can easily just sum the total amount of money won/lost in the end and sum my table hours. I usually look at 3 things, or 4. Total money won compared to how many table hours, and I glance at total real time I spent, and then perhaps how many hands I played. But to me the important stat is longterm BB/100. But tracker can give you an adjusted true win rate per hour if you want.And of course you'll often be roughly even or slightly down at a lot of your tables if you're quad-tabling. It all depends on the hands you get, whether stuff holds up, and are your draws hitting? All kinds of stuff. Also if you're quad-tabling you're usually playing much more ABC than your best possible game.