[Closed] How many Hands to beat the micro's?

played abt 35k on nl10, 250k on nl25 and 300k on nl50

That is a very subjective question.

I'm only up to NL10 so I am not very experienced but I think its fairly safe to say its subjective. There will be a number of factors which affect the rate a person progresses through the limits such as:

BRM - some people are more conservative, some more aggressive.

Learning potential - How quick a player can learn strategy

Variance - It's very easy to play well and still lose 2 or more stacks in a session

Offers - making use of new player bonuses to give the bankroll a kickstart.

I'm sure there are plenty of other things too, but I think my point is clear!

imo it's all about ur mindset,up to nl50 the games are easily beatable,although i myself havent beat nl50 yet.

I've currently taken:

20,000 hands to beat NL2 to get to $100
19,000 hands to beat NL5 (12.16bb/100)

Currently playing NL10, 9,600 hands at 4.82bb/100 (Most of that is because of some weird tilt I went on where I was barreling 3 times with nothing is a -$40 session :()

Originally posted by MrMardyBum
Cos I'm sure I'm fucking retarded or something 113k hands and I am now back at NL5 and only beating that at the mediocre rate of 3.45BB/100 which will probably drop when I play next ♦

I'm in the same boat. I think we're just slow learners. ♦

For me I was multi-tabling too quickly because I used to do 8+ in limit poker. When I dropped back down to one table I noticed I won. For now I'm just playing 2-3 tables and keeping an eye on my winrate. Variance might cause me to drop a table, sure, but at least I can focus on making the right plays. Also I take better notes when I keep it to only a few tables.

I think you have to make a decision. Do you want to grind out a lot of tables for money/rakeback/strategy points/bonuses/etc or do you want to learn how to beat poker so you can move up to 200nl and higher?

Not sure how much hands, wasn't using tracker up to nl25 but seemed like forever

from 50$ 18k at nl4, 12k at nl10, 15k at nl25, to get to 30bi for nl50

but i did get rb + rake race money as well though

Have a look here...

https://forums.pokerstrategy.com/forum/thread.php?threadid=88997

Something like 70k hands to get to NL50

Funktor

Originally posted by funktor
Have a look here...

[removed link to Card Runners promotional material]

Something like 70k hands to get to NL50

That guy is a mid/high stakes player and a CR coach. He's a terrible benchmark unless you want to say that it takes a "pro" 70k hands to do it. His NL5 numbers are sick though. ♠_biggrin:

I managed to get to NL50 quite fast, it took me about 30k hands to get to NL25 and I didn't play NL25 for more than a week, when I got to NL50.
I think the thing that helped me is that I played only NL FR cashgames all the time, I never played any tournaments or short-games. I think you improve much faster this way.

Ah yea, it didin' take me long to move up from nl25 to nl50 too, because I degened up pokerstrategy second starting capital on pacific into 600$ in few days

I guess it depends on the websites too. Some are definitely tougher than the others.

Glad you started this thread, actually

First, I would like to say that I am struggling too, but I have only played 20 000+ hands

There are few things to take into consideration, I think:

1. Not everyone is winning. Only about 10-15% of poker players brake even and even less are getting profit. The money has to come from someone, right? Someone has to be a fish after all ♦ At the moment I am still the fish, for example. You think that all the users of PS are winning!? Think again.

2. Most of those "in 30k hands from zero to hero" stories are exagerrated, to say at least. We had a story in news that a guy made a 300 km journey in 4 hours on a pushbike averaging 70km/h. The fact that he was riding behind the truck was hardly mentioned ♦

3. It takes about 40k hands just for variance to even out - I have played 25k and KK still has higher win percentage than AA and I am miles under the EV graph. If someone says that they made through 3 levels in 30K hands, they are just lucky and when they will realise that at NL25 or NL50, ten it is going to cost them much more than for you and me at NL5 and NL10

4. I have tried NL2, NL4, NL5 and NL10 on three different platforms and I don't think there is much of a difference in skill level. If anything, I think there are more fish in NL10, because it is a rounder number and its easier to place bets in 0.5 and 0.10$ chips.

All in all I wish you good luck because I do know how you feel.

Originally posted by SilverSag
It takes about 40k hands just for variance to even out

This might be true

If you play Razz

well i think that it depends on a quality of a player..
I´ve already played around 500k hands since the last summer and I am still playing NL5-10..
so when you are bad it can take a while

Originally posted by poldinhoo
well i think that it depends on a quality of a player..
I´ve already played around 500k hands since the last summer and I am still playing NL5-10..
so when you are bad it can take forever

FYP

Sadly, its quite true.

I've seen lots of rogs stucks in low stakes because his game is poor or have some tilt problems.

Originally posted by NightFrostaSS

Originally posted by SilverSag
It takes about 40k hands just for variance to even out

This might be true

If you play Razz

Yes, that is exactly what we need here - a useless, smartass comment...

1. I am playing Texas Holdem
2. I have played 30 000 hands.
3. My KK win percentage is higher than win percentage with AA.

Win percentage (not winnings, because bet size can vary obviously) of AA should be higher than that of KKs in a long run, right? With a "long run" I mean a run long enough for variance to even out. If that has not happened in 30 000 hands, then it is pretty safe to assume that at least 40k hands are needed for variance to even out, maybe even more.

Thats simple logic based on elementary mathematics. If you think that is wrong then I think you can shove your comments together with your diamond status where the sun don't shine and go comment somewhere else

p.s. unless there is some major fault with the way PT3 records data or/and Everest Poker site is rigged ♦

Here you go with a 20 BI rule assuming a 6big blinds/100 win rate

Hands needed to move to next level bb/100 big blinds To be won Br for next level (20BI)
50
25000 6 0.02 30 80
50000 6 0.04 120 200
33333 6 0.1 200 400
50000 6 0.2 600 1000
33333 6 0.5 1000 2000
33333 6 1 2000 4000
2

Ok it doesnt look good. The columns dont appear the way they should.
So here it is again:

Basically with your starting capital of 50$, following a 20BI rule and a winrate of lets say 6 big blinds /100 hands you need:

From 0.02 to 0.04 bb : 25000 Hands
From 0.04 to 0.1 bb : 50000 Hands
From 0.1 to 0.2 bb : 33000 Hands
From 0.2 to 0.5 bb : 50000 Hands
From 0.5 to 1 bb : 33000 Hands