HEM users and Stars players please look here

[verstehen]

Since Hold Em Manager now has an "fpps per hand" module built in, let's post your fpps per hand for various levels.  I see to recall that 200NL gets nowhere near twice as many FPPs as 100NL, it's more like 1.4x as much, and I'd like to see how other levels and limit poker compare.

[verstehen]

0.39 fpps per hand at 100NL over the last 5k hands.  Seems a little low.

[Deadmoney]

1 x
1 x

gold cards @ 600 hands 


EDIT: There was a tourney buy-in to a $100,000 not sure if it was satellite or the Buy-in

The buy-in amount was 75 x 's gold cards!!!!

[Tony]

Great idea!

1/2 limit (6 max): 0.31 VPPs/hand (1k hands)

2/4 limit (6 max): 0.49 VPPs/hand (21k hands)

3/6 limit (6 max): 0.73 VPPs/hand (11k hands)

5/10 limit (6 max): 1.09 VPPs/hand (5k hands)

NL50 (6 max): 0.23 VPPs/hand (14k hands)

NL100 (6 max): 0.37 VPPs/hand (74k hands)


One thing to bear in mind is that an individual's preflop style can affect these numbers.  For example V, you are laggier than me preflop so I'd expect your numbers for NL100 to be a bit larger than mine.

Also I noticed recently that if you open for 4 times the big blind at NL100 and get at least one caller you hit the 0.40 rake, which helps to accumulate VPPs quicker than if you just open for 3x or 3.5x.  This is what I've been doing recently, even though I actually think it's better to open for less.

[verstehen]

0.40 at 100NL last session.  And very good point about raise sizing.

[verstehen]

0.49 at 200NL 6-max.  Seems quite low.

[MellowYellow]

It may be similar to 1/2 vs 2/4 FR limit.

As far as chasing VPPs the amount at risk over many tables playing $2/4 vs 1/2 isnt enough to justify, you only get SLIGHTLY more VPPs/hand at 2/4 than at 1/2.

[verstehen]

You're probably right.  There is an FPP "sweet spot" in every game and clearly 100NL is that spot.  Unfortunately that means it's also much tougher to beat the rake over the long run. 

How about 5/10 limit though...    Play 90k hands and you're SN already.

[MellowYellow]

yeah, the only drawback to 5/10 limit besides needing to have tons of bankroll is that there isnt very many tables going a lot of times, but MAN you get a TON of VPPs/hand.

[poskid]

yeah, the only drawback to 5/10 limit besides needing to have tons of bankroll is that there isnt very many tables going a lot of times, but MAN you get a TON of VPPs/hand.

You may need to multi-site in order to get enough tables at 5-10.  Particularly since table selection is goin to be more difficult and important.

PK

[verstehen]

I don't know, I just looked online now (about 8:30 AM pacific time, non-peak hours for sure) and there were already 20 tables of 5/10 limit and more if you count HU.  5/10 is not really high stakes for limit, it's probably about the equivalent of 1/2 NL where you really need $5000+ to be decently rolled but there are still some gambling fish mixed in with the better players. 

[MellowYellow]

Oh, I was thinking FR only for some reason, if you played both 6 and FR you could play a lot, but your bankroll would have to be a LOT larger than any roll I ever had to play lots of 5/10 6max tables.  Man the swings would be so crazy, I couldnt handle losing $1,000 in 2 hours like i KNOW would happen on occasion.