How do you know you are winning player?

[maccatak11]

Yeah i guess i could have clarified what i meant by a winning player.

A winning player to me is someone who has shown they can beat the stakes that they are playing, i.e. make a decent profit (not sure what a decent profit is though, but i guess stats like bigbets/100 hands can let you know - these stats are new to me too pete, i have only started to use PT more seriously recently).

I guess a winning player at a particular stakes (5c/10c) or whatever the case may be is ready to move up to the next stakes (i.e. they have won a big enough bankroll at the lower level to move up).

For the casual/hobby player, 'not losing' may be the only goal that they have. Until recently also, this has been my goal only, but since deciding that 'points' from online crapshoots didn't really appeal to me anymore (i still love the late freerolls btw, they are just too late) i thought 'where to from here?'

The solution was, that although my current poker bankroll is tiny, i would start to take online poker more seriously. I would find a specialty (instead of playing a mixture of MTT, SNG and ring games), pick one type of game and study everything about it so that i can get good at it, move up the stakes as my hopefully growing bankroll allows me to and eventually play poker as a means to suppliment my income. If i could one day earn $50-$100 a week from playing online poker for several hours, then this would be great.

So recently i have decided that 6-max ring games are for me. I have read a lot of stuff, implemented some of it into my game, and have been doing reasonably well over the past couple of weeks, playing a fair few hands (nearly 18 hours in the past week which equated to around 3000 hands - i play two tables at once).

So thats the background for this thread. I was trying to find out whether i was just running good, or if i was on the way to becomming a 'winning player' which is a goal of all of us i think.

Sorry if i sounded elitist Pete (clearly wasn't my intention, but im done arguing) and this thread wasn't meant to be for a very select few, but for everyone to post their opinions. But if somebody didn't get something that was said, its up to them to ask really (perhaps by PM) not for you to fight the laymans battles.


But yeah it would be good to get back on topic. There would certainly be a few people on this forum who do make a bit of money playing online poker, so i would like to hear from them as they are probably much more experienced than i am - when did they know that they were a winning player?

[AJG]

Using PT like stats to determine if you are a winning player is a bit loose.

BB/100 really only applies to ring games.
For those who have mentioned confusion around this, BB = Big Bets = 2x the Big Blind and it comes from Limit Holdem.

If you play Tourneys, it is ROI (Return on Investment) that counts, BB/100 is virtually meaningless here.

And whichever of these stats or criterion you do use, pick a goal and aim...
These days with rakeback and cashback for players with enough points, even a break even or slightly -EV player can profit from online poker. Consider a break even player who plays enough for Pokerstars Super Nova Elite. They can get $20K for 2Million points! So technically they could lose 10K over the year and still come out 10K ahead!

As for when to move up a level, I only ever consider bankroll (BR) for that, and the rules I use in managing it. You can always move back down a level if you have to or feel the need to for whatever reason. But as I stated in another thread or 2, I mainly play HU poker to build my roll/make some money and BR management is somewhat different for HU players as there is less variance, so you usually dont require as many buyins in your BR to play at a certain level.

[maccatak11]

HU4ROLLZ?

We need to get a forum heads-up league running again. I missed the last one.

[AJG]

HU4ROLLZ?

We need to get a forum heads-up league running again. I missed the last one.

Hell Yes! I'm IN!
I responded to Garth's post about new 888PL tourneys and asking what else people would like with: HU! SnGs and Tourneys...

[bennymacca]

Using PT like stats to determine if you are a winning player is a bit loose.

what better way is there to determine your winnings?

If you play Tourneys, it is ROI (Return on Investment) that counts, BB/100 is virtually meaningless here.

that goes without saying. but matthew was talking about playing ring games.

[bennymacca]

just out of interest aaron, what usernames do you use on other sites?

[Origami]

but at some point you need to put a figure on what you are doing.

Why?

Can't a player be happy with "not losing"? especially if poker is a hobby?

having read with considerable interest the previous psots Pete's emotion's /realitive to your targets vs technical/statistical critieria benny the cunt uses makes for interesting debate...

I tend to agree with Bacon's above comment and have currently adopted a Folding = not losing approach to this fine game and think my stats reflect an above the average winning result if you use a statistical approach to Poker.

Interestingly enough Phil Ivey's comments have a very personal satisfaction /achievement to his Poker.
I have noted in my research and reading comments like most Pros only play the Premium hands and only go 'allin' if they have the Nuts....
Comments like the Pros are remembered by their big money wins and Gus Hansens Aussie Millions win was the first time he'd won a major in four years make you think winning isnt their major motivation., or more monies is made at the side games of these major events.

[AJG]

Interestingly enough Phil Ivey's comments have a very personal satisfaction /achievement to his Poker.
??? i think (and i have read it well before posted here) his statement makes perfect sense
I have noted in my research and reading comments like most Pros only play the Premium hands and only go 'allin' if they have the Nuts....
You cant seriously beleive that?
Comments like the Pros are remembered by their big money wins and Gus Hansens Aussie Millions win was the first time he'd won a major in four years make you think winning isnt their major motivation., or more monies is made at the side games of these major events.
Does Federer wanna win Wimbeldon for the prizemoney? NO!
Does Phil Ivey wanna win the 2009 WSOP for the prize money NO!
Of course its the win that means the most, the fact that they also win a shit load of money helps, but its the title that counts.
In fact its precisely because they play to win and not just cash that they may go so long without winning a major....
Where exactly does this 'side money' come from? Do you mean Side Bets? well players still need to do well (at minimum) to win a side bet, depending on the type of side bet. Or do you mean events other than the Main Event? Sure most pros will play a number of events at any given Major Series

benny the cunt: PokerStars is my main site - KidJoker666 but I havent played a MTT for months there, as Ive said HU mostly... infact the only MTTs Ive played for a while now have been 888PL! Ive profited from them, but way prefer playing HU
I have accounts at others, but have emptied them and dont play there anymore... maybe the odd points game at Fultilt.

[AJG]

Using PT like stats to determine if you are a winning player is a bit loose.

what better way is there to determine your winnings?

If you play Tourneys, it is ROI (Return on Investment) that counts, BB/100 is virtually meaningless here.

that goes without saying. but matthew was talking about playing ring games.

i didnt say it wasnt a good way to determine your winnings, and is certainly the easiest. Plenty of people simply record bankroll data in a spreadhseet though... +1 to Glyn's post imo.

It became obvious, yes, that Matthew was refering to ring games, but the thread title doesnt specify, so for those others who read I mention ROI...

Simplest way I know to determine if your a winning player (whatever you play) Bankroll > Deposit(s) = YES, but I know he was talking a bit more fine grained than this...

[bennymacca]

yeah, obviously if your bankroll is increasing, then you are a winning player.

the title should read - "what is a decent win rate for a player to aim for" because this is what we are really discussing