The 5% Rule
I was thinking quite a bit recently about expected hourly earn rates for playing No Limit Hold 'Em online. The following analysis is pretty tentative and is NOT based on any statistical or mathematical analysis. It is based on my experience alone cross referenced vs other top players experiences. It seems accurate enough to me, to warrant sharing it with you!
The 5% rule is based on full ring (6 Handed or More) cash games. The rule also applies to the "peak" earn rates at any level you may play. By peak play I mean close to perfect play (Haha) with little or no mistakes. Some people might actually make more than the figures listed as it is impossible to define perfect play in reality.
The 5% rule is based on the total investment committed to each session of poker and is the expected hourly earn rate you should expect in the long run. Some examples will make this clear :-
The 5% Rule : 5% of total investment = Expected peak hourly earn rate
Rules : 6 handed or more, 5-6 Multi tabling, above $600 buyin NL Level.
I play six $600 (3/6) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $3600. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $180 per hour.
I play three $600 (3/6) NL Tables and three $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $4800. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $240 per hour.
I play six $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $6000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $300 per hour.
I play four $1000 (5/10) NL tables and two $2000 (10/20) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $8000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $400 per hour.
I play four $2000 (10/20) NL tables and two $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $10000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $500 per hour.
I play six $2000 (10/20) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $12000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $600 per hour.
I play four $2000 (10/20) NL tables and two $5000 (25/50) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $18000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $900 per hour.
Every single example here is accurate in as much as it has been regularly achieved by the top players at these levels of play. Now some of you reading this won't be playing this high and in that case the 5% rule won't apply to you. A new rule comes into play, the 7% rule =)
The 7% Rule : 7% of total investment = Expected peak hourly earn rate
Rules : 6 handed or more, 5-6 Multi tabling, above $50 NL but below $600 NL.
I play four $50 (.25/.5) NL tables and two $100 (.5/1) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $400. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $28 per hour.
I play six $100 (.5/1) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $600. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $42 per hour.
I play two $100 (.5/1) NL tables and four $200 (1/2) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $1000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $70 per hour.
I play six $200 (1/2) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $1200. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $84 per hour.
I play six $400 (2/4) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $2400. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $168 per hour.
Note : I realize there isn't a sudden drop from 7% to 5% when you move from 2/4 to 3/6, it is laid out like this for simplicity's sake.
These are not solid rules but very general and in my opinion and experience and the experience of many other top players they are reasonably sound and close to accurate.
If you play only 3 tables the 5% rule will not be correct any more and will probably grow to 7%. A similar change will be needed if you play 12 tables, your return will probably drop to 3%.
Of note: the 5% rule probably does not decrease as you play only 25/50 NL or above as you will mostly be forced to play short handed thus achieving a higher hourly rate anyway.
The 5% rule is based on full ring (6 Handed or More) cash games. The rule also applies to the "peak" earn rates at any level you may play. By peak play I mean close to perfect play (Haha) with little or no mistakes. Some people might actually make more than the figures listed as it is impossible to define perfect play in reality.
The 5% rule is based on the total investment committed to each session of poker and is the expected hourly earn rate you should expect in the long run. Some examples will make this clear :-
The 5% Rule : 5% of total investment = Expected peak hourly earn rate
Rules : 6 handed or more, 5-6 Multi tabling, above $600 buyin NL Level.
I play six $600 (3/6) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $3600. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $180 per hour.
I play three $600 (3/6) NL Tables and three $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $4800. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $240 per hour.
I play six $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $6000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $300 per hour.
I play four $1000 (5/10) NL tables and two $2000 (10/20) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $8000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $400 per hour.
I play four $2000 (10/20) NL tables and two $1000 (5/10) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $10000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $500 per hour.
I play six $2000 (10/20) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $12000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $600 per hour.
I play four $2000 (10/20) NL tables and two $5000 (25/50) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $18000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $900 per hour.
Every single example here is accurate in as much as it has been regularly achieved by the top players at these levels of play. Now some of you reading this won't be playing this high and in that case the 5% rule won't apply to you. A new rule comes into play, the 7% rule =)
The 7% Rule : 7% of total investment = Expected peak hourly earn rate
Rules : 6 handed or more, 5-6 Multi tabling, above $50 NL but below $600 NL.
I play four $50 (.25/.5) NL tables and two $100 (.5/1) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $400. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $28 per hour.
I play six $100 (.5/1) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $600. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $42 per hour.
I play two $100 (.5/1) NL tables and four $200 (1/2) NL tables. Total investment in the current session is $1000. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $70 per hour.
I play six $200 (1/2) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $1200. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $84 per hour.
I play six $400 (2/4) NL Tables. Total investment in the current session is $2400. Expected peak earn rate is roughly $168 per hour.
Note : I realize there isn't a sudden drop from 7% to 5% when you move from 2/4 to 3/6, it is laid out like this for simplicity's sake.
These are not solid rules but very general and in my opinion and experience and the experience of many other top players they are reasonably sound and close to accurate.
If you play only 3 tables the 5% rule will not be correct any more and will probably grow to 7%. A similar change will be needed if you play 12 tables, your return will probably drop to 3%.
Of note: the 5% rule probably does not decrease as you play only 25/50 NL or above as you will mostly be forced to play short handed thus achieving a higher hourly rate anyway.
posted by TillerMaN | 4:09 PM
19 Comments:
Well, I just started the 6handed $25NL tables at party... and I've only played 2k hands, but I'm earning $64/hour over the 7 hours I've played... I know this will drop, and I know you didn't include $25 in your post, but surely it wouldn't be that much higher than the NL$50... I'd be gutted if my hourly rate dropped to $7 in the long term...
I purposely didn't include this level because the players are way too bad. I prolly shouldn't have included $50 either.
Yeah.. but you think it might even be the case where it is more profitable to 4table the 25s than the 100s... I mean, 7% of $400 is $28... I might be able to earn that at the $25s... with less risk..
I've only just started at Party, and I've been running really hot, so I don't really know.
Not if you are amongst the best players at your level. It is always better to move up if it is like swop for like.
This possibility might be more applicable to super high levels where the competition is so strong that it might be more profitable slightly lower down.
2000 hands is also not much for a good analysis, you want way more than that. That is a days play for some multi tablers =)
Heh, yeah, I figure I'll stay at the 25s for 10k hands, and move up if I'm over 15PTBB/100
Love your blogg :)
Just asking out of curiousity, not sure if you got some restrictions towards letting us now, but what tables / website do you mostly play at ?
cheers!
Your results are derived solely from the amount of money wagered, and the amount of tables played. It seems like there's a lot more to it than that. I don't think you can say a winning $200NL player who plays 6 tables will win exactly double of what a winning $100NL player makes. It's a fact that the higher you play, the better the competition will be, and the only thing you can do is work with what your opponent will give you. At smaller limits there's simply more mistakes people make that you can exploit, that make for higher percentual winnings. So to say the top earning potential for a $400NL player, $200NL player, and $100NL is percentually equal seems wrong to me. For the bigger limits though, I think your results might be accurate, as there's a much smaller skill discrepancy between for example $1000NL and $2000NL. Whether it's 5% or not is debatable. My gut tells me it's lower. It'd be very interesting to have some hardcore stats on this. Nevertheless, interesting post.
Thats exactly right but I tried to make it a general quick and easy calculation that would get you somewhat close to the truth.
There is no way to get precise figures without hours and hours worth of calculations probably not getting you much closer to the truth anyway.
We can definitely agree that peak earn can be worked out as a proportion of amount wagered though if you said for instance it is between 1% and 10% of amount wagered... that would go without saying.
I just feel that it is roughly 5% based on mines and others results at higher levels and at lower it has to be some what higher based on the lower skill level.
It probably goes 8.2, 7.8, 7.6, 7.3, 7.0, 6.8, 6.5, 6.2, 6.0, 5.8, etc etc etc for a whole buncha diff levels, number of players, skill level etc etc but that wouldn't be a very useful quick rule.
You'll never be able to do a statistical analysis with a good sample size because for every guy like yourself who's making 5% at a high level table, there's a guy at that same table losing 5%. Of course if you took everyone into account, the net gains would be negative (0% - rake). So how do you decide who to include in your data and who to leave out, considering that at a $2000NL table everyone should be highly skilled?
It applies to only the peak earn rate......
I thought I made that clear in the post =(
There are all sorts of standard of player at all levels, some make -5%, some make -2%, some make 1% , some make 2% etc etc
The 5% applies to roughlllllllly the peak earn rate. So a tiny tiny tiny proportion of players actually achieve this consistently.
twas clear as crystal
The rule also applies to the "peak" earn rates at any level you may play. By peak play I mean close to perfect play (Haha) with little or no mistakes.
what was the point made there? That pathetic idiots can't make awesome profit off poker? That's quite a revelation, anonymous
PP
Yeah I agree with tillerman's rule.. but and I think the 5% rule applies to a solid good player. A "perfect play" player should achieve 7% at NL400-1000 and 10% at NL100-200, and over 15% at NL25 imho. I mean comeon it's entirely possible to make 18$/hr 5tabling NL25 over the long-term.
cheers,
r3v
I think your estimates are actually pretty low for a "very good" player. I have a friend who plays 4 tables of $1000NL and who averages almost $500/hour. Granted he is an amazing player, but even I have results well above what you are estimating. I normally play 3 tables of $100NL and so far I am averaging around $35/hour, more than twice your estimate.
Hehe, I knew that would happen. I can categorically deny your $500 an hour though for four $1000 tables =)
Probably possible over a very good run of 20k hands or 1month or maybe a bit more.
He won't have $500 an hour after 6months or a year. That is not maintainable.
Yes, admittedly it is not a long term winrate, it is over his first 45k hands at 1000NL. His comparable winrate at 400NL and 600NL was actually much better, and it was over hundreds of thousands of hands(about 9 months play). Granted, he is considered one of the very top players on the site right now, so the amount he is making is not considered "normal". I just think saying that "perfect play" is 5% profit is WAY too low. I would say the absolute maximum someone could make long term is closer to 15%.
Oops, the winrates I speak of are for 6max tables, which would probably be more profitable hourly than full table games for a very strong player.
45k hands is 1 months play. If he did say 120 hours at $500 an hour he made $60,000. In other words he makes $100,000 for every 200 hours played. I played 1700 hours in my first year of poker. Are you saying in a similar time scale he will make $850,000 from just 4 5/10 tables? It is fantasy land =)
My point is he he wont maintain it over a year. He isn't going to make $60,000 + every month at 4 1k tables 6 handed or not.
It will take 1 bad month where he makes 20k or worse to totally destroy that hourly. Just one bad run and the peak hourly he is maintaining now dies and is gone forever. You can't get it back once you go below =)
I realize he may not be able to make $500/hr long term. However, even if his true winrate is $300/hr, that is still well above what you consider "perfect". Over 9 months of full time play he made more than 2x the winrate you consider to be the maximum at 400 and 600NL. I think that is evidence enough that your numbers are off.
A couple of things with this...I think you play at pokerstars (one of the tougher sites) and play mainly full ring. It's possible that 5% could be the maximum for that game.
Post a Comment
<< Home