BB/100 Hands, what is a good return?

Hi all,
I usually play NL SNGs, but lately I have been 2 tabling 5/10c NL FR whilst playing my SNGs in an effort to improve my post flop play. I am making a profit so far although I know my stats sample is still pitifully small to be able to read too much into it. According to poker Office I have made 7.54 BB/100 hands over 4832 hands. I'm curious to know if this is considered a good return and whether it is realistically sustainable over a much longer period.

Regards

3 BB/100 seems to be the gold standard.

3BB/100 (can we specify Poker Tracker BB/100, where BB = big bets) is a good rate of return at mid-high stakes but it's a bit disappointing at 10NL. However, it is a positive return, and as such demonstrates (when recorded over a large enough sample) that the player probably has the fundamentals sorted and can now work on leaks, missed value and tightening up/loosening up.

7.5PTBB/100 is a good return - it is sustainable, and really you should be hoping to keep it up at 10NL - much below that and you're really not taking advantage of the donkish play as you should. Sub 5k hands is not a big enough sample, but it is probably indicative of a solid game.

I haven't played high enough stakes to know about higher winrates, but in each instance I would be aiming for 10PTBB/100 at $10NL, 7PTBB/100 at 25NL and 5 PTBB/100 at 50NL. These are sustainable rates that demonstrate you are one of the better players at each level.

This isn't to say you can't run better - you can, but you shouldn't punish yourself if you don't manage to.

I will add, however, that a beginning player should expect a period of negative return, then break-even return, as they become accustomed to the fundamentals and then to the nuances of poker. As long as you are bankrolled for your level, and the losing period is relatively short, you should be fine.

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

Ill make the same post i always do to this question.

When you are playing stakes below 100nl your bbs/100 is an irrelevant figure. Nearly everyone who bothers to make some posts on FTR should be able to pick up the info here and be abale to camp at fr 100nl and make money. Hence, your first objectiove is a $2000/$2500 bankroll to play 100nl.

At small stakes, you will play so few hands to create a bankroll to move up to the next stakes level that your bbs/100 is irrelevant. 20k hands might seem a lot now, but really it isnt. At small stakes your bankroll should > bbs/100 simply because you should expect to beat these games unless you arent a winning player anyway.

So really bbs/100 is unimportant at the stakes i expect you are playing. Beyond that, 10bbs/100 long term is slaughtering a game as probably is 5bbs/100 over a decent sampe size. 2bbs/100 long term is about as acceptable as you get to be a winner.
But as noted, your sample size is too small anyway, and at small stakes you will move up too quickly for bbs.100 to matter so long as it is a positive number, whether 3, 5 or 16.

fwiw, i ran 18bbs/100 at 200nl for 55k hands, and only 4bbs/100 at 25nl for 20k hands. My real winrate should be bigger at 25nl and smaller at 200nl, with my lifetime being 5-9bbs/100 so far.

this thread always pops up

> 0

it is an important question, its just that for most beginners its incosequential IMO.

Maybe we should make a sticky called "What's a good bb/100 winrate" and put Miffed's canned response in it.

Thanks for the responses guys! I take miffeds point about 10 NL being no way to build a roll in a hurry, but I think I had to start playing FR somewhere to learn the ropes! Like I said in OP, I started out just trying to practice post flop play with low risk. Not sure its really helping tho given how wide a lot of players are at this level! Still, its fun having your set or boat called all in by TPLK