"Beating Levels"

[C8H10N4O2]

How many hands should you have recorded before you can safely establish that you are beating a certain level, and not just running hot?
I'm trying to build a plan of moving through levels and whatnot, so I'm looking for decent generalizations.
Thanks.

[DeadBabySoup]

i've heard 5000 hands before. but i look at it more from a bankroll perspective. once you've built your roll high enough to play at a higher level, you've beaten that level. i don't play cash often, but for SNGs, i generally play at 2% of my bankroll. once i've doubled it (plus 10% or so) i'll double my buy-in. you could apply the same to cash games.

[RiverstarsVictim]

i've heard 5000 hands before

Did you mean 5k or 50k hands? 5k is nowhere near enough.

From what I've read there really isn't any set number. I know from experience I done 13k hands straight on one site without ever experiencing a real downswing. By the time I got to 14k hands the beats were coming thick and fast. As I'd already cleared the bonus by then and wasnt getting rakeback I called it a day there and cashed out. My overall winrate was 10 ptbb/100 at the time of cashing out but I couldn't honestly say I was beating that level from these figures alone.

I think a lot depends on which limits and how many tables you're playing too. For the micros a good player ought to be winning more BB's/100 than he would at say at $1/$2 limits. 4 ptbb/100 seems to be the general consensus for a decent winrate but if you're 12 tabling at 3 ptbb/100 over a long enough period then you're comfortably winning here too.

To answer OP, from what I've read elsewhere, about 30-40k hands should give you some idea of where you are. I've also read it's possible to be ahead after 300k hands and still be a losing player, this does seem a bit much though.

[DeadBabySoup]

that should be 50k. but it varies a lot by style of play. a hyper aggressive player is going to have more variance than a rock. but both may be very good players.

[C8H10N4O2]

Thanks for the input everyone. How many hands per hour per table should I expect to get with 6 max vs Full ring?

[RiverstarsVictim]

Just had a quick glance at pokertracker and it's telling me I was getting about 55-60 hands/hour/table for full ring. I've just gone to 6 max myself playing on the turbo tables and getting between 80-100 hands/hour/table.

[GreaseStain]

don't think of it as "beating a level," just play. If you have 40 buyins at your current level, go and take some shots at the next level. If you lose a little, that's fine. Just make sure you drop back down. Once you drop down, it will make the game seem easier. Then, just build back up to your 40 buyin level and take another shot. Don't worry about it, just make sure you can muster the pride to drop down, and make sure you learn your mistakes when you fail.

[C8H10N4O2]

don't think of it as "beating a level," just play. If you have 40 buyins at your current level, go and take some shots at the next level. If you lose a little, that's fine. Just make sure you drop back down. Once you drop down, it will make the game seem easier. Then, just build back up to your 40 buyin level and take another shot. Don't worry about it, just make sure you can muster the pride to drop down, and make sure you learn your mistakes when you fail.

Not trying to be rude, but sorry, this advice falls under the useless category. I've built my bankroll many times. Right now I'm wanting to analyze a few things about my game, so I'm looking for the correct sample size to evaluate as I move levels this time, in order to be much more efficient etc. I'm not going to aimlessly wonder through building this time, and I'm going to establish a few things besides result oriented things before I move on. It's one thing to just move up when you have the bankroll to do it, it's another thing to move up when you are ready.

[RiverstarsVictim]

don't think of it as "beating a level," just play. If you have 40 buyins at your current level, go and take some shots at the next level. If you lose a little, that's fine. Just make sure you drop back down. Once you drop down, it will make the game seem easier. Then, just build back up to your 40 buyin level and take another shot. Don't worry about it, just make sure you can muster the pride to drop down, and make sure you learn your mistakes when you fail.

Your advice doesnt account for running hot nor clearing bonus and/or receiving rakeback which all contribute to building a BR.

As I said in my earlier post, I was running good for some 13k hands on one particular site. After 10k hands I was running stupidly hot with a winrate of about 27ptbb/100, it was unsustainable. Including bonus I was adequately rolled to move up but decided against it as I just knew I hadn't played through a downswing which for me was a big test at that time. By the time I got to 13k hands my bankroll was pretty much remaining a constant inclusive of bonuses so I was in fact actually losing over the previous 3k hands. By the time I got to 14k hands the beats were coming thick and fast and my winrate had dropped to 10ptbb/100. Now had I took your advice, I would've moved up after 10k hands and basically given money away (assuming the same variance) just to drop back down again without ever really knowing whether I was beating the current level or not.

[iceveins0901]

50k hands with a decent winrate should be sufficient to say that you can beat the level, I will usually run 10k hands a month, sometimes with a winrate of 10 ptbb/100, sometimes 1.5 ptbb/100, sometimes negative, but over a good enough sample like 50k hands you can usually come with a well rounded idea of how good you are at your current stakes.

[RAW_FORCE]

I think a lot depends on which limits and how many tables you're playing too. For the micros a good player ought to be winning more BB's/100 than he would at say at $1/$2 limits. 4 ptbb/100 seems to be the general consensus for a decent winrate but if you're 12 tabling at 3 ptbb/100 over a long enough period then you're comfortably winning here too.

To answer OP, from what I've read elsewhere, about 30-40k hands should give you some idea of where you are. I've also read it's possible to be ahead after 300k hands and still be a losing player, this does seem a bit much though.

Absolutely correct about factoring in the number of tables. Style of play has been mentioned and thats important also, along with how picky you are regarding table selection. Somebody 2 tabling the softest tables running will destroy them while the same player may make only 2ptbb/100 12 tabling random tables.

Also, from what I've heard/seen 4ptbb/100 at 100NL and up is a VERY good winrate. I can probably count the 100NL players on full tilt who win that much over a good sample size on one hand. Volume is very important. 2ptbb at 16 tables is more money than 4ptbb at 8 tables once rakeback and other bonuses are considered. Granted, its not so satisfying to play like a robot but people like money

50k hands seems like a conservative sample to me. I've had 50k hand stretches in the past where i've made 5.5ptbb/100 and 50k negative stretches. I would personally never try to reach any conclusions with less than 100k hands (and i play like a pansy nit). If after 50k hands you find yourself making 3+ptbb/100 its fairly safe to say you are a winner assuming reasonable standard deviation, but how much of a winner is still unclear in my opinion.

[infinii]

I'd be inclined to wait for 100k. 50k doesn't take that long to grind if you multitable, so hard to believe that a 50k sample size will even out your variance. 20k break even stretches are not out of the question.

As to beating a level, I think if you put in over 100k hands, can beat the level for more than 3BB/100 and have enough of a roll for the next level...you can consider moving up. How much roll you need depends on your own bankroll management requirements.