Recently, I came across an interesting image from GTO Wizard’s head coach, Tombos21, where he posted win rates for different stakes in 6-max no-limit hold ’em, and I was surprised.
The surprising thing is that only 7.5% of players at NL10 win at poker compared to 20.1% at NL500. When I read about that, I thought the difference in the number of winners is too big in favor of NL500, but then I saw the stats and the image.
Difference in Win Rates
We can see that NL500 players have significantly more breakeven players, with over 6-7% of players, and in NL10, it’s only around 2.5% of players who manage to be breakeven.
There is a drop in the number of players who can achieve a win rate of at least 5bb/100, and it’s shocking that only around 1-2% of all players win more than 5bb/100 at NL10, while the number for NL500 is around double.
This is due to a very high rake in micro stakes, where the rake increases to -9.1 bb/100, compared to -3.8 bb/100 at NL500, which is approximately 140% more at NL10.
This is for Bayesian adjusted win rates, which means that results will be a bit worse, as most players don’t have a big enough sample to determine their true win rate, so it’s dragging win rates of players with small samples towards the pool average.
| Stake | Winners | Pre-Rake Winners | Rake (bb/100) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NL10 | 7.5% | 53.2% | -9.1 |
| NL25 | 8.6% | 42.0% | -7.4 |
| NL100 | 9.0% | 43.2% | -7.3 |
| NL200 | 12.8% | 43.8% | -6.0 |
| NL500 | 20.1% | 51.1% | -3.8 |
If we observe raw results without adjusting (just filtering out players with less than 100 hands), the numbers go up for both stakes, but there is a significant bump-up for NL10 as it goes from 7.5% to 25.8%, and from 20.1% to 30.4% for NL500.
In my opinion, Bayesian-adjusted win rates are more realistic, as variance in small samples can swing results significantly.
| Stake | Winners | Pre-Rake Winners | Rake (bb/100) |
|---|---|---|---|
| NL10 | 25.8% | 35.4% | -9.1 |
| NL25 | 22.5% | 30.3% | -7.4 |
| NL100 | 28.8% | 31.8% | -7.3 |
| NL200 | 25.4% | 30.7% | -6 |
| NL500 | 30.4% | 34.1% | -3.8 |
If we exclude rake, we can see that we would have most winners at NL10 and NL500, while it drops down significantly in stakes between NL25 and NL200.
In these stakes, you are facing tougher opposition than at NL10 while still having to battle high rake, and once you hit NL500, the rake drops down significantly, while the competition between NL200 and NL500 shouldn’t be much tougher.
It is also important to note that these breaking points vary for each poker site and rake structure.
Conclusion
There have always been mentions of micros being rake-trap, and it was known in poker circles that higher stakes have lower rake, but it is nice to see the differences in win rates in one graph. It was also shocking how low the number of winners in micros is, and especially how low the number of big winners is.
Micros should be treated as a training ground, and once you are beating them, you should move up as soon as you have a decent bankroll to withstand the variance of the higher limit. Most money in poker is won once you reach higher limits, and you are ready to play there, skill-wise and mentally tough
It is also essential to have good site selection and ensure you have the best rakeback deal to minimize the money you are losing due to rake. If you are looking for sites to play, you should check Champion Poker, where you can get decent rakeback and monthly rake races to win additional money and negate those rake traps. Check our complete offer of sites by clicking here
If you want to read more about poker strategy, you can check our article about the types of mistakes in poker.
This article idea is courtesy of Tombos21.
