how much per 100 hands

[PrtyPSux 0]

Hey , I usually measure how Im doing acoording to BB x hr. I just started playing on party again (still think it sux but people are telling me its worth it cuz the fish) and now I can keep track of how many hands Im playing so I wanted to know how many big blinds I should be winning per 100 hands? This is what I did yesterday, I played 300 hands and went up 36 ( I thought that 12 bb x 100 hands might be too much isnt it ?) any way I played 200 more hands later on and lost a bunch got outdrawn w/ sets k's and then q's then I played 300 more hands and went back up. I was playing three tables and ended up I think it was w/ 2.6BB x 100 hands I saw that I played 22% of my hands and my win percentage if flops seen was %30. Im pretty sure that this was low because I played for about 5 hrs and playing three tables I think I shouldve won more..anyway it couldve just been a bad day but I just wanted to have an Idea of what I should be making in the long run per 100 hands because I think it might be a more accurate way to measure how much i win. thanksjust went back and did the math, and i made 1.6 BB x 100 so it was lower than it seemed ...

[Funkii 0]

the sample size is so small that it's pointless to compare it to what a good player gets.

[PrtyPSux 0]

the sample size is so small that it's pointless to compare it to what a good player gets.

If by sample size you mean the amount of hands I played then yes It is very small to really know how Im doing, but anyway, how much should I be making in the long run ?

[fleung22 1]

I was curious myself and asked my buddy, who's a pro, the same question. "How much is good?"He tells me that winning 1-2 BB per 100 hands is solid. Winning 2-3 BB per 100 hands is good.Less than 1? You've got work. More than 3? You might be ready to move up in limits.This can't be measured in 300-400 hands though. I mean I've had times where I've won 50 BB in 150 hands but that doesn't mean I'm godlike. Just like when the cards go rotten on ya you're not necessarily bad.When you take in to consideration the good swings and the times other fish suck out on you the BB/100 ratio should be pretty accurate.I'd say you need a good 8000 hands to measure your long term potential.Hope that helps.

[fflcdndctx 0]

Does that apply to NL also or just limit?

[troutsmart 0]

3+/100 is beating a game convincingly and tough to maintain over a hundred thousand hands, especially as you move up in limits. If you consistantly average 1-2, you're doing fine.

[fleung22 1]

I can't say that I know if the measurement (xBB/100 hands) is the same for NL.I pretty much stick to Limit for ring games so I won't comment on what I don't really know.troutsmart is right about the 1-2 BB figure especially the higher limits you hit. Think about Daniel...if you're playing $4000-8000 with players of that calibre then winning 1-2 BB/100 is pretty damn good.However, most of us on the FCP forum play $5-10 or less so 2+ BB/100 is very attainable.

[UglyJimStudly 0]

I was curious myself and asked my buddy, who's a pro, the same question.  "How much is good?"He tells me that winning 1-2 BB per 100 hands is solid.  Winning 2-3 BB per 100 hands is good.

Hmm, that seems on the low side to me. I understand the standard for live game play is about 1 BB/hour. Assuming about 35 hands/hour (which is a decent low limit rate, at higher limits it seems to move slower) that would be a little over 2.8 BB/100 hands. So by that standard you're not really into solid territory until you're over 2.5 BB/100 or so, IMHO. I certainly aim well above that clip (though I usually measure it by the hour, since I mostly play live), and I don't consider myself pro quality.