Thoughts on Running bad for UNL guys

[ssdex]

I browse through posts really often in the brew and in general where I see people who have 10 buyin downswings and are ready to quit poker, or are just on life-tilt in general. It is really hard when you first begin poker to understand the concept of "variance". I have written before on my uber nitty strategy of bankroll managment. I am pretty sure there is no other 50nl reg that plays as overrolled as I do, even if I moved up to 100nl, I would still probably be the most overrolled reg there. The reason I prefer to play lower and overrolled has a lot to do with the emotional side of poker. Running bad at higher limits, the downswings emotionally effect me too much and prone me to tilt, much more so than I already am.

The point of this post is to understand that you should be emotionally "numb" to the limits you choose to play. If you don't have a lifestyle that relies on poker for $ then I think you can emotionally move up much faster. I know at the beginning of my poker career when I was in school I could care less about the money at first. But it is hard to deal with when you think you have/take ownership to $15k sitting in a poker account and then 3 weeks later there isn't anything there because your busto. I'm to lazy to link ama's pooh bah post, but if you havent read it, you should. He calls it "connecting", I just say you should be numb.

So, here is my 2 cents. 10 buyin downswing happen people. I have a lot of "unecessary variance" in my game. So I will always have multiple 5 buyin downswings per month and a really good month won't include a 10 downer. A really bad month will probably have a downswing much larger than this. Over 100k hands you can expext 2 or 3 of these type of downswings. But if you are playing where you belong (this in my opinion has nothing to do with your bankroll), then you will be emotionally numb to these swings. You will understand your moves are +EV and you have been playing good just running poorly. You will shove b/c you know you have the right equity, and not be scared to pull the trigger just because you've missed 9 of your last 10 combo draws. It won't matter if your on a 15 buyin downswing or you've played 20k hands at breakeven.

Just because you have 30-40 buyins for a level doesn't mean you should feel obligated to play it. You should play at levels you can emotionally beat, not just beat +EV. Taking shots is obv ok, but take small shots, not big ones. Lots of players can beat levels way above the one they are playing, but they are emotionally -ev at those levels because they can't become "numb" to the instant results. Being emotionally -ev can often overcome even the greatest edge in cards for the shorterm. Often bad enough to bring us close to busto and crush our confidence in poker. Tilt during this time becomes way worse then normal, and they find themselves in the utter state of busto. Most of us have been there. I play nl100 nl200 and even nl400 from time to time, when I am having good months or I feel like I am really keen on my game, but when I find myself venting over beats and not being "numb" towards the results I come back to my haven which is nl50 at stars.

There have been times during my poker career during my worse downers where I considered the fact that I had just run good over hundreds of thousands of hands and was not indeed a winner, times where I wasn't sure if I could beat nl10, much less nl100. If you are playing at levels where you are "numb", I think it is possible to avoid these moments in your poker career. Learn from others mistakes!

This post was inspired by my last 100k hands which were my worse ever at nl50. I ran 4bb/100, which is kind of cancerous and had several very bad downswings (1 20 and 1 25 buyin downsing). Ive also been running at 2bb/100 at nl100 over the last 20k, which is also a poor result, but after review, I feel better about it. The next 100k will go better, maybe like the 400k before that. I am in no hurry to move up permanently, and i'm ok with that now. I'll move up when i'm "numb" at those levels again, i'm just not there yet. Happy reading and good luck at the tables, hope this post is helpful..... great pooh bah post ama.... in his words... connect!

[Warteen]

Tl;dr.

Robusto = rich, not poor. The opposite of busto.

The "u" in uNL represents the Greek letter used as the symbol for "micro", not actually the letter U. So it's incorrect to capitalize it.

[ssdex]

ty, just got off a 20 hour poker binge and didn't read over before post!

[Sweir]

ssdex, nice post. I know what you mean about being numb, I recently moved up and had a downswing, moved back down for a couple of days and then back up again and now feel I am numb to that limit.

[relativity_x]

A few thoughts.

[ QUOTE ]
The point of this post is to understand that you should be emotionally "numb" to the limits you choose to play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this. If you start playing numb (I read don't care), you will start playing haphazardly. I think what you're looking for is don't be afraid to lose money (play within your bankroll).

FWIW, sometimes people play better when they're scared to lose.

[ QUOTE ]
10 buyin downswing happen people

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have huge buy-in swings every month, I'd start wondering if it's more than variance especially a 20/25+ BI swing. As sbrugby says:

[ QUOTE ]

Your results are the direct result of your performace. Don't point any fingers when things aren't going well since there is no one to blame but yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not sure what you mean by numb, but I don't think it's a good idea to play numb to the limits you play.

[jk1986]

[ QUOTE ]

The "u" in uNL represents the Greek letter used as the symbol for "micro", not actually the letter U. So it's incorrect to capitalize it.

[/ QUOTE ]
NIT

[Warteen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The "u" in uNL represents the Greek letter used as the symbol for "micro", not actually the letter U. So it's incorrect to capitalize it.

[/ QUOTE ]
NIT

[/ QUOTE ]

The dimensions of the "box" in your avatar look a bit questionable - if anything, it looks like more of a luck trapezoid. Maybe that's what you were going for.

[relativity_x]

[ QUOTE ]

The dimensions of the "box" in your avatar look a bit questionable - if anything, it looks like more of a luck trapezoid. Maybe that's what you were going for.

[/ QUOTE ]

boxes can be any dimension. I believe you're thinking of a square.

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
A few thoughts.

[ QUOTE ]
The point of this post is to understand that you should be emotionally "numb" to the limits you choose to play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this. If you start playing numb (I read don't care), you will start playing haphazardly. I think what you're looking for is don't be afraid to lose money.

FWIW, sometimes people play better when they're scared to lose.

[ QUOTE ]
10 buyin downswing happen people

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have huge buy-in swings every month, I'd start wondering if it's more than variance especially a 20/25+ BI swing. As sbrugby says:

[ QUOTE ]

Your results are the direct result of your performace. Don't point any fingers when things aren't going well since there is no one to blame but yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm not sure what you mean by numb, but I don't think it's a good idea to play numb to the limits you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play tons and tons of hands every month

I have more variance when I 9 table b/c my tilt becomes exponentially worse, which kills my winrates, but after I get to supernova I think I will cutdown to 6 tables.

being "numb" has nothing to do with not caring and spewing money---- thats not the concept---- being numb has to do with retaining confidence even after very bad runs of luck

im not saying you should not review your play if your in a bad downswing, but if that downswing has less to do with tilt and more to do with running bad, then you should keep plugging away.

imo you can't play a level to your highest potential if you are scared of losing the $, all this does is tigten you up and make you less likely to play your best game. If you play better when your scared then you should be playing a tighter game then you normally play b/c you spew too much playing laggier styles.

[corsakh]

Gentlemen, your box discussion is fascinating. Whats your opinion on lunch boxes?

[relativity_x]

[ QUOTE ]
my tilt becomes exponentially worse

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that tilt is a bitch. I often do it when i 6/9 table, which it does affect your winrates. I can't strike that up to variance though.


[ QUOTE ]
being numb has to do with retaining confidence even after very bad runs of luck

[/ QUOTE ]

I also agree with that 100%, but I don't think that's numb. Staying confident is very important especially after putting in a losing session/sessions

[ QUOTE ]
If you play better when your scared then you should be playing a tighter game then you normally play b/c you spew too much playing laggier styles.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very true and why players play better at higher levels because the money means more. I feel if you get "comfortable/numb" at a level, you start playing complacent/laggy.

I like the response post a lot. You make solid points in the response post. When I read your initial post, I took numb to mean comfortable. I think you nailed it the second time with CONFIDENCE.

[relativity_x]

yummy, I love lunch boxes. just had lunch as a matter of fact.

[ssdex]

this is what I mean by "numb"

early in my poker career when I was a higher stakes reg at pokerroom, I lost a 700bb pot against a huge monkey at 1000nl when I got it in almost golden. I had AJ on a rainbox K Q 10 flop, $ in on the flop, he had AA... Turn K River K........ GG dex, 7k pot. I picked up one of my 20 inch dells and threw it through a wall. I was nowhere near "numb" at that point in time. I would be upset about that hand no matter what limit, but at the time I couldn't even think about playing poker for like 2 weeks. If that was at nl50, I would simply probably say a few cuss words and then just get back to playing, that is being emotionally "numb"... knowing I got the best of it but ran bad, and be able to keep playing, although depending on how my session was going, and if the fish was gonna stick around, I may take a 20 or 30 minute break.

[jk1986]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The dimensions of the "box" in your avatar look a bit questionable - if anything, it looks like more of a luck trapezoid. Maybe that's what you were going for.

[/ QUOTE ]

boxes can be any dimension. I believe you're thinking of a cube .

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[CmnDwnWrkn]

A ten buy-in downswing is NOT normal variance. Not saying it isn't out of the question, but far too many people are quick to blame variance for downswings like this. I think most of them simply aren't playing well.

[relativity_x]

a trapezoid is only two dimensions as well.

Fwiw, a cube is a square in the xy,yz,zx planes.

[Bonesy]

What about a rhomboid?

[Willem]

[ QUOTE ]
A ten buy-in downswing is NOT normal variance. Not saying it isn't out of the question, but far too many people are quick to blame variance for downswings like this. I think most of them simply aren't playing well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have some news for you. The people on this forum for the main part (well, myself at least) suck at poker. That's why they are playing microlimits.

[geoncic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A ten buy-in downswing is NOT normal variance. Not saying it isn't out of the question, but far too many people are quick to blame variance for downswings like this. I think most of them simply aren't playing well.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have some news for you. The people on this forum for the main part (well, myself at least) suck at poker. That's why they are playing microlimits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or they are trying to build a bankroll.

[Nogatsira]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A ten buy-in downswing is NOT normal variance. Not saying it isn't out of the question, but far too many people are quick to blame variance for downswings like this. I think most of them simply aren't playing well.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have some news for you. The people on this forum for the main part (well, myself at least) suck at poker. That's why they are playing microlimits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or they are trying to build a bankroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree.
Most people here arent super at poker but they are atleast trying to get better by just visiting the forum.
I'm pretty sure EVERYONE at uNL can beat these limits on the long run if they try cause you all gotta agree: they play at low stakes is TERRIBLE!

[ssdex]

a good 50nl player makes 35-40 an hour, I mean im no rocket science, but last I checked 35-40 an hour is a really sick job, some people like myself, just can't stomach the swings at higher levels like they used to. I've not had a losing month at nl50 since the beginning of my poker career, but I have had some sick sick losing months higher up.
there are many reasons why people, good players stay at nl50 nl100 and nl200, besides for building bankrolls, being busto or being bad at poker.

[Nogatsira]

[ QUOTE ]
a good 50nl player makes 35-40 an hour, I mean im no rocket science, but last I checked 35-40 an hour is a really sick job, some people like myself, just can't stomach the swings at higher levels like they used to. I've not had a losing month at nl50 since the beginning of my poker career, but I have had some sick sick losing months higher up.
there are many reasons why people, good players stay at nl50 nl100 and nl200, besides for building bankrolls, being busto or being bad at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

35-40/hour is insane at NL50

[hennnerz]

Tl;DR, cliff notes please?

[relativity_x]

I ran red hot lastnight and made 100 dollars an hour last night 4 tabling 25 NL over 330 hands (62.5 PTBB/100) running 22/17/3.5.

That's sick. I'll post the graph for you doubters when I get home.

[relativity_x]

don't let bad beats get the best of you.

[jonyy6788]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a good 50nl player makes 35-40 an hour, I mean im no rocket science, but last I checked 35-40 an hour is a really sick job, some people like myself, just can't stomach the swings at higher levels like they used to. I've not had a losing month at nl50 since the beginning of my poker career, but I have had some sick sick losing months higher up.
there are many reasons why people, good players stay at nl50 nl100 and nl200, besides for building bankrolls, being busto or being bad at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

35-40/hour is insane at NL50

[/ QUOTE ]

one of the few times I'll agree w/ ssdex

I'm not capable of beating NL400, prolly not NL200 at the moment, but I'm making a nice income /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
a good 50nl player makes 35-40 an hour, I mean im no rocket science, but last I checked 35-40 an hour is a really sick job, some people like myself, just can't stomach the swings at higher levels like they used to. I've not had a losing month at nl50 since the beginning of my poker career, but I have had some sick sick losing months higher up.
there are many reasons why people, good players stay at nl50 nl100 and nl200, besides for building bankrolls, being busto or being bad at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

35-40/hour is insane at NL50

[/ QUOTE ]

if he's good enough to make this at 50nl. move up dont be a b.itch.

[EMc]

10 buy ins is not even a downswing, its variance.

[derosnec]

at our stakes, it's not even variance. it's spewing. i probably do analysis of my sessions more than 95% of people on this forum (with Poker EV and Poker Stove) and every 10 BI loss i've had in the past was avoidable (and it's been a long time). people play so exploitably (large calling range, small betting/raising range; putting you on AK, etc) that a 10BI loss is very rare without spewing (like c-betting wrong flops, making big c/r bluffs, raising limpers with wrong hands/wrong position, 3-betting light the wrong people, bad game selection, etc)

[Speedlimits]

[ QUOTE ]
at our stakes, it's not even variance. it's spewing. i probably do analysis of my sessions more than 95% on this forum (with Poker EV and Poker Stove) and every 10 BI loss i've had in the past was avoidable (and it's been a long time). people play so exploitably (large calling range, small betting/raising range; putting you on AK, etc) that a 10BI loss is very rare without spewing (like c-betting wrong flops, making big c/r bluffs, raising limpers with wrong hands/wrong position, 3-betting light the wrong people, bad game selection, etc)

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT. 10BIs downswing at micros is so bad, you must have some serious holes in your game if this is happening.

[jessyj07]

[ QUOTE ]
10 buy ins is not even a downswing, its variance.

[/ QUOTE ]In my >500k hands at the micros my biggest downswing is just under 7 stacks at the $25 and the last couple were tilt. It is not variance and more likely that people need to be more objective about their own play.

[Shoe Lace]

[ QUOTE ]
10BIs downswing at micros is so bad, you must have some serious holes in your game if this is happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. I did this once at NL2 (!). It was after a 12+ hour session. After reviewing the session the next day I couldn't even figure out what I was thinking when I put my stack in the middle on some hands.

2 BIs were variance (big pairs got cracked by bs when the money went in good). The rest was the result of poor play (probably due to getting those big pairs cracked + too long of a session + thinking it's impossible to lose at these limits + not really playing postflop).

These are leaks, not variance. This never happened again, and so far (knock on wood) I haven't seen any noticeable downswings yet. I might drop 2-3 buyins in the middle of a session but I usually manage to fight my way back (with solid play, and not letting it effect me).

[jerryf1914]

i must be doing something wrong...how is it possible to have a 25 and 20 buyindown swing in 100k hands but still run at 4bb/100.......

[hennnerz]

[ QUOTE ]
i must be doing something wrong...how is it possible to have a 25 and 20 buyindown swing in 100k hands but still run at 4bb/100.......

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a 10 buyin downsing in 11k hands (mostly spew) but I was still at 13bb/100. So, its easy to do that.

[jerryf1914]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i must be doing something wrong...how is it possible to have a 25 and 20 buyindown swing in 100k hands but still run at 4bb/100.......

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a 10 buyin downsing in 11k hands (mostly spew) but I was still at 13bb/100. So, its easy to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

please tell me how because i am obviously not winning in many spots where i should be

[hennnerz]

Review your sessions, post hands, read threads, reply on hands, improve/change aspects of your play...

[jerryf1914]

[ QUOTE ]
Review your sessions, post hands, read threads, reply on hands, improve/change aspects of your play...

[/ QUOTE ]

the thing is though since i have more posts than you i must be doing that already, so there is something else i am doing wrong...

[hennnerz]

Ive only been playing properly a month. Maybe you could be more willing to totally open up your game. Watch videos too btw..

[Triggerle]

A 10 buy-in downswing is perfectably possible without spewing or playing bad. Having several sets cracked in a row, maybe along with a couple KK<AA ai preflop situations while missing a bunch of flops will get you down 10 buy-ins pretty quickly. All of this is statistically perfectly possible and even likely for some of us to happen given the amount of hands we all play combined.

Maybe this is avoidable by doing variance-reducing things like folding AA pre-flop or by waiting with your sets until the river so no flush is possible before you put your money in, but to be honest, that's just not good poker.

Sure, an exceptional player may pick up some pots with good handreading skills in between and not go down all the way but very few of us are that good and if we were we wouldn't be playing here.

I am still recovering from a 17 buy-in downswing and despite having been singled out as an example of a losing player on this forum because of this I'm still confident that my winrate is indeed positive. In my case it started with one of these cases described above for 10 buy-ins. Then I lost another 7 to a 95/70/oo player who would call pre-flop all-ins with stuff like 87o vs my AA and win several times in a row. Avoidable? Sure, I could have refused to play at this table especially after being down so much already. I maintain, however, that my play against this guy was hugely +ev for probably all of the 7 buy-ins I lost.

I don't want to get into a discussion about my specific play there as I am the only one who has all the information needed to make this discussion and I by no means want to state that I played perfectly during this stretch.

However, to make a blank statement that stuff like this is impossible for a winning player at these stakes is ignoring the mathematical realities of the game.

[jessyj07]

[ QUOTE ]
A 10 buy-in downswing is perfectably possible without spewing or playing bad.

[/ QUOTE ]It's possible but very very unlikely and more likely due to playing bad than running bad. A lot of people will say to themselves that "I got unlucky" or "chalk it up to variance" in spots where strong hands were beaten because they couldn't fold when it is likely they are beaten.

[Triggerle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A 10 buy-in downswing is perfectably possible without spewing or playing bad.

[/ QUOTE ]It's possible but very very unlikely and more likely due to playing bad than running bad. A lot of people will say to themselves that "I got unlucky" or "chalk it up to variance" in spots where strong hands were beaten because they couldn't fold when it is likely they are beaten.

[/ QUOTE ]

I qualified the statement that you snipped out of my post with a scenario that is unlikely but far from very unlikely (or even very very unlikely).

[Shoe Lace]

On paper, yeah you can lose upwards of 10BIs or more at nano/micro stakes but the "reality realities" of the game dictate leaks as being the source rather than math/variance -- especially if these occur multiple times over a fairly small sample (100k or so).

I must be running hotter than a mofo + tax because I cannot see how you can lose 10BIs at nanos unless you really caught the serious end of "running the worst ever" (set over set, set vs runner runner bs when it went in good, KK vs AA, etc).

Investing 4xBB preflop vs a maniac, and then stacking off 100BBs with TP?K or a small overpair (by calling his aggression) on a super coordinated board is not variance. This is a leak. That play might be caused by tilt (even if you don't realize it at the time), but spew is not variance.

[Mr_Pathetic]

FWIW I just went on a nice little 12.8*6 downswing at Pokerstars .02/.05. Even though 2 hands were me getting stacked for $10 with flush over flush and flopped full house over flopped full house I still estimate that at least 35%-40% was pure tilt that could and should have been avoided. Like shoving AA on a 346 flop when a super passive guy I have played 1500 hands with check raises me all in. He never does that with a hand I beat but since he just coolered me 50 hands before I called it. Most downswings without tilt here should only be from 5-8 tops using 6 as a buyin. Of course people buyin for ten so that changes things when you get stacked while over ten yourself.

Without confidence you cannot win/succeed/whatever you want to call it. This not only goes for poker but it goes for everything like getting a decent job and picking up women or negotiating a decent price on a car or house.

[derosnec]

let me elaborate a little more.

at our stakes, people are generally passive (unless you're sitting at a table full of tags, in which case you are doing something wrong). the lower the stakes, the more passive (5nl more passive than 50nl and so forth)

so, that leads to a lot less variance

let's use a few hands as an example, using how the hand plays at the micros and how it plays at higher stakes where variance is very real (based on my reading of hands at msnl/hsnl and bbv over the years)

you raise, some fish calls

on the flop he makes a straight and you make a set

micro stakes: you bet, he calls; turn brings four to a straight and say you decide to check, he checks; river fills you up, and you end up getting all in with him

higher stakes: you bet flop, get raised, you push, he calls. there's your variance.

another hand

you raise, fish calls

micro stakes: you flop nut flush draw and bet, fish calls with a set. you turn the flush and bet, fish calls. you get all in on the river and win.

higher stakes: you flop nut flush draw and bet, you get raised by a set, you push and he calls.

another hand:

you raise pf with KK

micro stakes: some fish calls you pf with AA. you flop a set and get all in and win.

higher stakes: opponent 3-bets you pf for the 4th time tonight and you 4-bet, and he pushes with AA and you call.

so, my point is at the micros, you often get the chance to put your money when you are way ahead after getting to the nuts much cheaper than if you were at higher stakes. so, often you are putting your stack when you are 80%+, not when you are 60/40 or 40/60 or 55/45, etc.

so, while a 10 BI downswing is possible, it is in my experience very unlikely without some major leaks and spewage

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
so, while a 10 BI downswing is possible, it is in my experience very unlikely without some major leaks and spewage

[/ QUOTE ]

oh boy I'm not touching this one with a ten foot pole, not this time... =/

[jk1986]

nice post derosnec /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
let me elaborate a little more.

at our stakes, people are generally passive (unless you're sitting at a table full of tags, in which case you are doing something wrong). the lower the stakes, the more passive (5nl more passive than 50nl and so forth)

so, that leads to a lot less variance

let's use a few hands as an example, using how the hand plays at the micros and how it plays at higher stakes where variance is very real (based on my reading of hands at msnl/hsnl and bbv over the years)

you raise, some fish calls

on the flop he makes a straight and you make a set

micro stakes: you bet, he calls; turn brings four to a straight and say you decide to check, he checks; river fills you up, and you end up getting all in with him

higher stakes: you bet flop, get raised, you push, he calls. there's your variance.

another hand

you raise, fish calls

micro stakes: you flop nut flush draw and bet, fish calls with a set. you turn the flush and bet, fish calls. you get all in on the river and win.

higher stakes: you flop nut flush draw and bet, you get raised by a set, you push and he calls.

another hand:

you raise pf with KK

micro stakes: some fish calls you pf with AA. you flop a set and get all in and win.

higher stakes: opponent 3-bets you pf for the 4th time tonight and you 4-bet, and he pushes with AA and you call.

so, my point is at the micros, you often get the chance to put your money when you are way ahead after getting to the nuts much cheaper than if you were at higher stakes. so, often you are putting your stack when you are 80%+, not when you are 60/40 or 40/60 or 55/45, etc.

so, while a 10 BI downswing is possible, it is in my experience very unlikely without some major leaks and spewage

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know where you play nl50, must not be at the same site as me...... I can't remember the last time I flopped a combo draw and someone flopped a set and we didnt get it in on the flop. If you can avoid 10 bi downswings then you are just running good bottom line. I do tilt, this is true, and many of my downswings are because of this. But I have had a 20 buy in downswing which consisted of getting aipf with KK vs AA 6 times in a period of 250 hands and never improving. Also during this period i was 0/15 in pots where I either had a combo draw vs a set or a set vs a combo draw. If you play enough hands, these freak events happen, and if your playing optimally, you are going to have a 10 buyin downswing and often one much greater than that.

[Vyse]

It's extremely possible to have a 10 BI downswing simply by playing normal. I did, then I had brief 5 BI heater, then a 10K break even stretch. Absolutely disgusting, I bitched everywhere, I tried analyzing everything, but I was overall playing my B+ game that whole time. It can happen.

The real problem is the longer your tough luck goes, the more difficult it is not to tilt. The more difficult it is not to say, "Jesus christ, this [censored] AGAIN. Come on, I have barely tilted for 30K hands of this garbage, but EVERY SINGLE TIME... Fine, I'll deal with this." But every time something bad happens, it's that much easier to get a defeatist attitude, to get frustrated, to start slipping up.

Even intentionally avoiding "flips" and just focusing in getting your money in on spots you believe are 60/40 or better can still result in a 10 BI DS quite easily. Everyone will run worse than they ever imagined mathematically possible in poker for an insane amount of hands. And when it happens to you, you'll believe.

[Thuey11]

ummm, i disagree with anyone who says you have serious problem at micros if u lose more than 10 buyins. I have had a 26 buyin downswing at 10nl over 13K hands in the past but i am a lifetime winner of 12ptbb/100 winner over 75k hands at 10nl. And i felt like i was playing my normal game throughout the downswing as well.

[Thuey11]

oh i might as well add that i 9 table

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
so, while a 10 BI downswing is possible, it is in my experience very unlikely without some major leaks and spewage

[/ QUOTE ]

oh boy I'm not touching this one with a ten foot pole, not this time... =/

[/ QUOTE ]

lol

ssdex, not everybody plays scared money when playing with 25 or 30 buy ins for a given level. It`s important to move up. Besides making more monies, you also gain more experience, cause the games are tougher. Everytime when I moved up, and then for some reason had to move down again, I was usualy crushing the lower lewel.

IMO, move up, but have the will to move down and grind it back up when your running bad. Much more important is to not change your style, don`t play nittier or more aggro at the beginning. Just do what has been working for you and slowly adapt to the new lewel.

Note: The ones who say that 10BI downswings can`t happen without mayor leaks are wrong. I just analized a 11BI downswing that happened over 3hrs to me multitabling. Reason where 8 hands. KK-AA (2), AA-AKs, OESFD (1), set over set (2), flopped 2nd nut flush - Nutflush.

It was a 6000 hands session night. I made about 7BI back.

[Spechel EDD]

this threads just an an elaborate joke right? is ssdex like this forums fgators?

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
this threads just an an elaborate joke right? is ssdex like this forums fgators?

[/ QUOTE ]

DUDE RUN SERIOUSLY I FELL INTO THIS TRAP LAST TIME

JUST LET THEM HAVE THEIR DOWNSWINGS

RUN BITCH, RUNNNNNNNNNNN

[corsakh]

I dont know guys, but I never had a 20BI downswing. I never even had a 10BI downswing. I only had like 5BI - 6BI swings before followed by loosing other 10BI due to tilt. This is common, and this is what I think most people experience.

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
I dont know guys, but I never had a 20BI downswing. I never even had a 10BI downswing. I only had like 5BI - 6BI swings before followed by loosing other 10BI due to tilt. This is common, and this is what I think most people experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

you clearly havent played enough hands, have you. just because YOU havent had a 57bi downswing, doesnt mean its impossible. what are you saying, that my 48bi downswing was bad play? what the hell would you know? i lost like 2bi due to tilt, but thats still a 46bi downswing, all from variance. i dont care how bad my opponents are, they can still suck out, cant they. so fu and f your sanctimonious "IVE NEVA HAD A 10bi DS" bullcrap, just you wait, its your turn soon. math will always win in the end, it doesnt matter how well you play. the downswing is COMING for YOU!

ama0330, don`t you see what`s happening ? They are getting under your skin, get out now, before it`s to late !

[ama0330]

nobody respects my 50bi downswings /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[corsakh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont know guys, but I never had a 20BI downswing. I never even had a 10BI downswing. I only had like 5BI - 6BI swings before followed by loosing other 10BI due to tilt. This is common, and this is what I think most people experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

you clearly havent played enough hands, have you. just because YOU havent had a 57bi downswing, doesnt mean its impossible. what are you saying, that my 48bi downswing was bad play? what the hell would you know? i lost like 2bi due to tilt, but thats still a 46bi downswing, all from variance. i dont care how bad my opponents are, they can still suck out, cant they. so fu and f your sanctimonious "IVE NEVA HAD A 10bi DS" bullcrap, just you wait, its your turn soon. math will always win in the end, it doesnt matter how well you play. the downswing is COMING for YOU!

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed. Who would know that a 48BI downswing could be due to bad play from such an awesome player. Total crap, its all variance.

ps Has FBI accepted your application yet?

[terrible]

why the hell would anyone play a style that could create a 50 buyin downswing at the micros? are these the same people that run at 30/25, squeeze 3 times an orbit and then spew some fps postflop against players who don't even understand position? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[+EV]

[ QUOTE ]
Tl;dr.

Robusto = rich, not poor. The opposite of busto.

The "u" in uNL represents the Greek letter used as the symbol for "micro", not actually the letter U. So it's incorrect to capitalize it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I aspire to someday be this nitty.

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
why the hell would anyone play a style that could create a 50 buyin downswing at the micros? are these the same people that run at 30/25, squeeze 3 times an orbit and then spew some fps postflop against players who don't even understand position? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

uhh clearly you don't know what it means to play optimally, I guess you're happy playing your little mister "meh meh +EV" tight solid logical style, yeah good luck with getting RUN OVER by actual POKER players like me, who understand that 65bi downswings are just a natural part of the game, maybe you need someone to hold your hand when you lose a stack, but I know what it means to be a HUSTLER

[+EV]

[ QUOTE ]
Gentlemen, your box discussion is fascinating. Whats your opinion on lunch boxes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously not square. At least not the traditional ones. Maybe you can find a square one these days. But not one with Transformers on it. Those are definitely all rectangular.

+EV

[corsakh]

Ama, now your overdoing this.

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Ama, now your overdoing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah I guess. If I were a mod I'd instalock this thread

[+EV]

Hello,

I just completed 35K hands at NL25 6max.

A few thoughts since I just pulled out of a +10buyin downswing.

I was playing a little above my head. My downswing began when I started playing 4 tables instead of 3. It ended when I started playing 3 tables again instead of 4. I finally recognized that I was trying to do too much and making too many bad decisions. I would go though my PT hands and say "WTF was that all about?"

I finally realized that 4 tables is just too much for me right now. I still have to think about decisions. They are not automatic. Once I came to this realization, the results were immediate and swift. Resume upswing.

Could it all be coincidence? Yes. Could a lot of what happened be varience? Yes. But I am positive that some of it was bad play. Furthermore, I would submit that anyone who is playing and doesn't think that their game can be improved is only fooling themselves.

Seriously, if there is someone out there telling you that 10BI downswing at NL25-50 is not reasonable and you are putting up with it, wouldn't you be interested in double checking to see if you had to go through it?

Also, some people play a higher variance game than others. What is normal for a 16-13-2 player is not normal for a 23-17-5 player. If someone wants to play with a VPIP in the upper 20's or higher they will accept higher variance as part of their day to day life. If they can accept it than so should we. (by we I mean nits). Maybe we can learn something also?

+EV

[Gelford]

Sticky ?

[ QUOTE ]
Sticky ?

[/ QUOTE ]

lolhaha, this is getting better and better.

why do people keep on saying 10BI downswing ? It`s variance ...

My style is almost weak passive 19/13/2.1, and I have huge swings.

BTW, what about running hot like [censored] ? I`ve had them too. 8BI in 350 hands, on PS on monday vs. regs /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Gigglegirl]

"But I have had a 20 buy in downswing which consisted of getting aipf with KK vs AA 6 times in a period of 250 hands and never improving. Also during this period i was 0/15 in pots where I either had a combo draw vs a set or a set vs a combo draw."

Bring that to the Probability forum. I'm sure they will confirm for you that you are the unluckiest man in the world.

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]

Bring that to the Probability forum. I'm sure they will confirm for you that you are the unluckiest man in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]


Trouble is, that someone has to be the unluckiest man in the world, tho I suspect ssdex has leaks, sick downswings do occur .

[Baintz]

[ QUOTE ]
nobody respects my 50bi downswings /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

ROFLMFAO

Gold.

[Baintz]

Bad downswings can happen no matter how optimally you play.

For example, lets say that the probability of never going on a 20 BI downswing is 99.99%. This player is a good winner, and is not affected by tilt, so he always plays his A game. Now assume there are 5000 such players, all grinding micro stakes.
The probability OF AT LEAST 1 of them having a 20 BI dowswing is around 40%.


Obviously I've plucked the initial assumptions out of the air, but it goes to show that just because something hasn't happened to you, it doesn't mean it's highly unlikely to have happened to anyone else, due to the huge player pool at uNL.


With a big enough player pool there will be players who will run hotter than you ever thought possible, just as there will be those poor souls who keep getting kicked when they're down.

[Perk76]

I had a 12 BI downswing at NL25 within 3.5k hands. It doesnt take much for that to happen. For those stating its not possible, I dont think you have logged enough hands.

There are times when you run into coolers KK into AA or AA<KK. Unavoidable. Top it off with the usual flush chasers hitting against your top sets and flopped straights, you can be stuck very quick.

If your playing optimally and pushing your edges, you will lose a few in a row. Combo draws will not come through for you, it happens.

As an example, you are in a reraised pot with AsKs and flop is Js5s2h...are you sacking off here after betting the flop?

Or you call from the bb with QdJd and flop 10d9d2h, are you felting here against a tag?

Good players will take more beats than they can dish out, and when you get your cash in good at the micro levels, you will still lose a portion due to the idiots.

Its quite possible to have large downswings in small numbers of hands, but the same can be said about up swings too!

[terrible]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
why the hell would anyone play a style that could create a 50 buyin downswing at the micros? are these the same people that run at 30/25, squeeze 3 times an orbit and then spew some fps postflop against players who don't even understand position? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

uhh clearly you don't know what it means to play optimally, I guess you're happy playing your little mister "meh meh +EV" tight solid logical style, yeah good luck with getting RUN OVER by actual POKER players like me, who understand that 65bi downswings are just a natural part of the game, maybe you need someone to hold your hand when you lose a stack, but I know what it means to be a HUSTLER

[/ QUOTE ]

oh, you were kidding. haha.

edit: i love these posts explaining 20 buyin downswings with "KK running into AA three times".

[blackize]

A 20 buyin downswing at 50nl or below is mostly bad play. I believe this to be true. Whether or not it is is immaterial. If you chalk it all up to variance and don't scour your game for leaks you will never become a great player.

[Triggerle]

Nobody talks about chalking it all up to variance. It's actually the "not possible" trolls who think in these black and white terms.

BTW the number 1 troll in this thread has previously stated that someone with a downswing of more than 10 buy-ins is a guaranteed overall losing player. The same guy then proceded to go on an 11 buy-in downswing. I would guess he still sees himself as an overall winning player.

Go figure.

[ama0330]

[ QUOTE ]
Nobody talks about chalking it all up to variance. It's actually the "not possible" trolls who think in these black and white terms.

BTW the number 1 troll in this thread has previously stated that someone with a downswing of more than 10 buy-ins is a guaranteed overall losing player. The same guy then proceded to go on an 11 buy-in downswing. I would guess he still sees himself as an overall winning player.

Go figure.

[/ QUOTE ]

LMAAAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

[RollTide77]

I think this "subject" needs to be clarified.

1. How many tables are we talking?
2. Should 10+ BI downswing "not possible" be replaced with "possibly avoidable or minimized"?

[edit]I think I'll add to this that if you get 3bet AI PF holding KK playing a 20/15 game by a 16/10 passive villain that you aren't playing optimal poker if you call.

[Triggerle]

Unless you play at world class level (and even then), there's always room for improvement. So playing better will minimise any downswing.

Of course, the results oriented players then turn this around and think they are better than the rest if their downswings are smaller (I think this elitist attitude and tone has been demonstrated in this thread).

[kewl_cph]

This week I moved up to NL100 and immediately dropped 10 BIs.

Last night I invited a friend of mine over to look through my PT DB and sit through a session with me.
I got some good input on my play and having my friend there help me stay in line and not tilt.

Some non-braindead play and positive variance have me +$30 at NL100 now /images/graemlins/smile.gif

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y210/kewl_cph/poker/nl100.jpg

[Nogatsira]

wow good influence you got there by ur friend

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Bring that to the Probability forum. I'm sure they will confirm for you that you are the unluckiest man in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]



Trouble is, that someone has to be the unluckiest man in the world, tho I suspect ssdex has leaks, sick downswings do occur .

[/ QUOTE ]

leak::: I play for stacks too often, I think I shove too often in value bet situations and call thin a little bit too much, im a very read dependent player, which can create huge swings, im pretty sure you play a similar style gelford

[ssdex]

let me also clarify we are talking about people who play 8 tables minimum, I don't think i've ever had a downswing worse than 15 when I wasn't 9 tabling or more. I think this is where all these people who are like "10 buyin downswings are spewing" come from, are the super nits who table selected b/c they only play 4-6 micro tables. I don't really care who I am playing at micros, you can put me at a table full of tags and I'll still beat the game. winrates may not be as good, but table selection is not really that important until nl200 and nl400, but if you want to take the time to do it and surf rooms for fish im sure your winrates will be better, i'm just too lazy.

another thought- while chasing fish is great and profitable if your building a roll, you still need to learn how to beat the regulars, if you can't beat the regs at micros, it don't get any easier higher up.

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Bring that to the Probability forum. I'm sure they will confirm for you that you are the unluckiest man in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]



Trouble is, that someone has to be the unluckiest man in the world, tho I suspect ssdex has leaks, sick downswings do occur .

[/ QUOTE ]

leak::: I play for stacks too often, I think I shove too often in value bet situations and call thin a little bit too much, im a very read dependent player, which can create huge swings, im pretty sure you play a similar style gelford


[/ QUOTE ]

Well the thing with this kind of style is, that in general, It leads to a steadier flow ... usually I just bank, but once every two weeks, there is a day or two, where I just loose every freaking coin flip and villians hit every single draw.

[RepulseMonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gentlemen, your box discussion is fascinating. Whats your opinion on lunch boxes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously not square. At least not the traditional ones. Maybe you can find a square one these days. But not one with Transformers on it. Those are definitely all rectangular.

+EV

[/ QUOTE ]

Be careful with your useage of the term "lunchbox" in the UK this is what people will think you're referring to http://wuzzadem.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/crt.jpg
http://www.mensunderwearportal.com/images/Gregg-Viper-String.jpg

[ssdex]

I thought this post needed a graph.... this is July, been running really bad again. there are like 4k hands of nl25 at absolute b/c i only have $400 there and I want a roll there without going busto..... the other 29k is 50nl at stars, around hand 14 or 15k is the typical 10 bi monthly downswing that has been killing my winrates the last 3 months

http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/7132/julyyyylo9.jpg
Shot at 2007-07-18

[+EV]

[ QUOTE ]
Bad downswings can happen no matter how optimally you play.

For example, lets say that the probability of never going on a 20 BI downswing is 99.99%. This player is a good winner, and is not affected by tilt, so he always plays his A game. Now assume there are 5000 such players, all grinding micro stakes.
The probability OF AT LEAST 1 of them having a 20 BI dowswing is around 40%.


Obviously I've plucked the initial assumptions out of the air, but it goes to show that just because something hasn't happened to you, it doesn't mean it's highly unlikely to have happened to anyone else, due to the huge player pool at uNL.


With a big enough player pool there will be players who will run hotter than you ever thought possible, just as there will be those poor souls who keep getting kicked when they're down.

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense but this logic is so flawed in so many ways that it it totally irrelevant.

You have not addressed how many hands this should occur over for one thing. Is the chance against 99.99% over 10K hands or 100K hands? This is important. IF it is over 10K hands, then you are saying that the average person expects to have a 20BI downswing over 10K hands 0.01% of the time they play 10K hands or 1 in 10,000 times that they play 10K hands.

So the probability is that someone has 1 20BI downswing every 100,000,000 hands based on your percentage.

I think that the likely hood is probably actually greater than the one you gave however even making it 10 times greater does not change the result that it should be rare.

I do not believe that without some insanely high variance play (or tilt/bad play) there is no way to justify 10+BI downswings in 10K hands as normal for a winning player.

+EV

[+EV]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless you play at world class level (and even then), there's always room for improvement. So playing better will minimise any downswing.

Of course, the results oriented players then turn this around and think they are better than the rest if their downswings are smaller (I think this elitist attitude and tone has been demonstrated in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your first point and don't think it is results oriented to prefer having less swings. I certainly don't think that it is an I am better than you type attitude. However, I think that a 10+BI downswing should not be a normal occurance. To those who think it is, I recommend going over some hands to try to make sure there is not a level of spew present. Just like if a friend mentioned to me that he only changes his oil every 15K miles I would say "hey don't you think you should try to do that more often." Just because something works, does not mean it is optimal.

+EV

[ssdex]

the whole point of this post was to point out to the micro guys that 10 bi downswings can and probably will happen at some point in there poker career, especially before they have consistant 4bb/100+ winrates, obviously as your winrate goes down your your likelyhood for larger downswings increases.

OF COURSE the average 10bi downswing will be due to tilt/bad play/ whatever, but this is not always the case

I really am beginning to wonder if I run just like ungodly worse then everyone else

literally everytime I have a set, someone has a higher set
I never get it in with KK vs AK preflop, but when I do, an A always comes.
I never get it in with AA preflop, but when I do 1/2 the time I lose... and then these are always fun

PokerStars No-Limit Hold'em, $0.50 BB (5 handed) Hand History Converter Tool (http://poker-tools.flopturnriver.com/Hand-Converter.php) from FlopTurnRiver.com (http://www.flopturnriver.com) (Format: 2+2 Forums)

SB ($26.75)
BB ($10.10)
UTG ($14.75)
MP ($19.25)
Hero ($133.70)

Preflop: Hero is Button with T/images/graemlins/heart.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif.
UTG calls $0.50, <font color="#CC3333">MP raises to $2.5</font>, Hero calls $2.50, <font color="#666666">2 folds</font>, UTG calls $2.

Flop: ($8.25) 7/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 4/images/graemlins/club.gif, 9/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="#0000FF">(3 players)</font>
UTG checks, MP checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $5</font>, UTG folds, MP calls $5.

Turn: ($18.25) T/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players)</font>
MP checks, <font color="#CC3333">Hero bets $12</font>, MP calls $11.75 (All-In).

River: ($41.75) 9/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="#0000FF">(2 players, 1 all-in)</font>

Final Pot: $41.75


MP has 9d 9s (four of a kind, nines).
Hero has Th Td (full house, tens full of nines).
Outcome: MP wins $41.75. Hero wins $0.25.

[Baintz]

As I said I picked up the numbers out of the air, and they are probably far from accurate.
My point was to illustrate that even though something may have a minute chance of occuring, GIVEN ENOUGH TRIALS (a big enough player base in this example), it will happen to someone with probability close to 1.

I was just responding to those people who were saying 'well the worst I've had is 7-8 BIs, so you must just be playing bad'. This is just being extremely naive of how bad variance can be.

[Triggerle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unless you play at world class level (and even then), there's always room for improvement. So playing better will minimise any downswing.

Of course, the results oriented players then turn this around and think they are better than the rest if their downswings are smaller (I think this elitist attitude and tone has been demonstrated in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with your first point and don't think it is results oriented to prefer having less swings. I certainly don't think that it is an I am better than you type attitude. However, I think that a 10+BI downswing should not be a normal occurance. To those who think it is, I recommend going over some hands to try to make sure there is not a level of spew present. Just like if a friend mentioned to me that he only changes his oil every 15K miles I would say "hey don't you think you should try to do that more often." Just because something works, does not mean it is optimal.

+EV

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I should clarify that I'm talking about one or two of those bad runs in over 100k hands. Having 10+ buy-in downswings every 10k hands would indeed increase the likelyness of easily fixable leaks. (This is for nitty players only. Someone who pushes small edges hard and therefore gets looked up more often will swing up or down more violently than a nit.)

Then there's of course the special circumstances like the one I described earlier in this thread. (Playing your top 10% against someone who goes ai pre with any two cards and losing what is basically a 60/40 flip several times in a row and then the fish leaves.)

[Vyse]

[ QUOTE ]
Unless you play at world class level (and even then), there's always room for improvement. So playing better will minimise any downswing.

Of course, the results oriented players then turn this around and think they are better than the rest if their downswings are smaller (I think this elitist attitude and tone has been demonstrated in this thread).

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen.

[AZplaya]

It's funny; I haven't posted here in about 6 months due to taking an extended break from poker. Shortly before my break I made a post on this same topic (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&amp;Board=ssplnlpoker&amp;Number=71 94553&amp;fpart=&amp;PHPSESSID=) We can debate this topic over and over, but I think the the bottom line is this:

Is it possible to play completely flawless poker and still have a 10 buy-in downswing? Yes

Is it likely? Absolutely not.

Anyone who says they dropped 10 buys and can't attribute any of it to tilt, mistakes or bad play is likely f.o.s. Everyone makes mistakes, and denying that fact in this game is only setting you up for failure. On the other hand, saying that a person who has a 10 buy in downswing has major leaks/isn't a winning player/sux at poker is equally as asinine.

[derosnec]

there are alot of things that go into losing 10 BIs that have nothing to do with the suckout/cooler hands. this is for our stakes, not for higher stakes where games are very agressive.

i'm not going to go through the entire list of what those things are but they include things like bad seat selection (sitting to the immediate right of a fish); c-betting wrong flops (especially in 3bet pots); 3-betting the wrong people; bluffing too much in big pots (it might be counterintuitive to some, but the bigger the pot, the less often you should bluff); not picking up enough small pots; and so on. so when you combine those with a few coolers/suckouts, then you have an unnecessary 10 BI loss.

i compared my last 60k hands (which are the hands after i fixed alot of leaks) to previous months using Poker EV, and i ran better in previous months yet had insanely swingy graphs and a low winrate. now, i am running worse but have a much smoother graph with a good winrate with my worst run at -6 BIs (2 of which were due to bad play). according to Poker EV, if at any time i should have had a -10 BI run, it should have been over my most recent hands, not in previous months.

so, yeah, -10 BI is possible but i still think it's so improbable because of the way the micros play. i can't find a single -10BI stretch in my db (which, sadly, is very large) where it was not completely avoidable.

[Mr_Pathetic]

Brutal honesty FTW. There was a post with a variance spreadsheet where you could enter your PTBB and Std Dev and see how a typical 100k hand run would look like. You can regenerate the graph several times just to see the different scenarios.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rt=all&amp;vc=1 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=8457727&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=all &amp;vc=1)

http://pokerfilz.50megs.com/

[+EV]

[ QUOTE ]
As I said I picked up the numbers out of the air, and they are probably far from accurate.
My point was to illustrate that even though something may have a minute chance of occuring, GIVEN ENOUGH TRIALS (a big enough player base in this example), it will happen to someone with probability close to 1.

I was just responding to those people who were saying 'well the worst I've had is 7-8 BIs, so you must just be playing bad'. This is just being extremely naive of how bad variance can be.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, and the point that I think was missing is that even though it can and probably will happen, it should not happen over and over and over again. If it does there is something wrong.

+EV

[derosnec]

pokey argued that that the spreadsheet was incorrect. so don't take the program's output as necessarily accurate.

[ssdex]

how do you calculate your own standard deviation?

[Mr_Pathetic]

in pokertracker under session tab in more detail there is std dev per 100 hands.

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
a good 50nl player makes 35-40 an hour, I mean im no rocket science, but last I checked 35-40 an hour is a really sick job, some people like myself, just can't stomach the swings at higher levels like they used to. I've not had a losing month at nl50 since the beginning of my poker career, but I have had some sick sick losing months higher up.
there are many reasons why people, good players stay at nl50 nl100 and nl200, besides for building bankrolls, being busto or being bad at poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

are you SSDEX on stars? if so, you're not as good of a player as you may seem

[C4LL4W4Y]

[ QUOTE ]
if so, you're not as good of a player as you may seem

[/ QUOTE ]

world-class insight there. seriously.

[70yssej]

[ QUOTE ]
are you SSDEX on stars? if so, you're not as good of a player as you may seem

[/ QUOTE ]while it may be true, that's not very nice to say in public. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if so, you're not as good of a player as you may seem

[/ QUOTE ]

world-class insight there. seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]


i play with SSDEX D-A-I-L-Y

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
are you SSDEX on stars? if so, you're not as good of a player as you may seem

[/ QUOTE ]while it may be true, that's not very nice to say in public. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

what? i'm just pointing out that it may not be bad beats that are destroying his winrate

[70yssej]

fwiw ssdex, I think some of your leaks come from open limping to much utg and open limping in general. You play to many pots OOP and you're not aggressive enough postflop. Calling reraises in position to much also is a leak esp. when you're not great postflop.

[ssdex]

lol @ meleader, This is really funny coming from a guy that has played 500 hands with me, who knows what table you played with me, how many tables I was playing, whether or not I was tilting, what kind of style I decided was best to try and play that day

sometimes i play 40/30, sometimes i play 15/10 sometimes 25/10......... it really depends on my table, who i'm getting action and from and what i'm trying to accomplish

basing what kind of player I am on the few hands you've played with me makes me lol

also, Im positive im up on you lifetime, why would you make a comment like this? its just dumb--- ill post screenshots if you like

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw ssdex, I think some of your leaks come from open limping to much utg and open limping in general. You play to many pots OOP and you're not aggressive enough postflop. Calling reraises in position to much also is a leak esp. when you're not great postflop.

[/ QUOTE ]

I will make a lot of plays at 50nl that are much less than optimal, I am capable of playing many styles

many of these styles have terrible leaks, but if I am open limping, then there is a player at the table I would love to play any pot against post flop, in position out of position, it doesn't matter

I consider myself to be a pretty good post flop player.

[jk1986]

Meh just quit grinding the game for 5ptbb/100 and learn how to crush it for 10-15ptbb/100, then see how many downswings you have!

[70yssej]

[ QUOTE ]
I consider myself to be a pretty good post flop player.

[/ QUOTE ]that's the problem. Try looking at your play objectively.

[70yssej]

[ QUOTE ]
many of these styles have terrible leaks, but if I am open limping, then there is a player at the table I would love to play any pot against post flop, in position out of position, it doesn't matter

[/ QUOTE ]also this is exploitable to any aggressive player paying attention. The hands you open limp are implied odds hands that will very often not make a hand thus making any 2 cards a raise with position against you.

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
many of these styles have terrible leaks, but if I am open limping, then there is a player at the table I would love to play any pot against post flop, in position out of position, it doesn't matter

[/ QUOTE ]also this is exploitable to any aggressive player paying attention. The hands you open limp are implied odds hands that will very often not make a hand thus making any 2 cards a raise with position against you.

[/ QUOTE ]

meh i play the style that has the biggest winrates on average over very large samples for me with the amount of tables im playing... if you play 400nl or 200nl with me, you will notice im a 19/16 playing 4-6 tables which is pretty close to absolutely optimal play. If im playing too many tables (which i have been doing for like 3 months now) trying to close out my supernova at stars, then I am going to do things that look dumb and call oop and probably fold a lot, which looks bad and i will make certain plays that are -ev to make other plays much more +ev

and I am very aware that playing 9-12 tables is what is killing my winrate b/c often I will be like how the hell am I in this 3bet pot oop with 44, wtf

[Capone]

nh

[ajmargarine]

Has this thread degraded into silliness and namecalling enough for it to be locked? It's way tl;dr.

[Vyse]

No, but it's getting there if they keep arguing about ssdex and his irrelevant play.

[ssdex]

[ QUOTE ]
Brutal honesty FTW. There was a post with a variance spreadsheet where you could enter your PTBB and Std Dev and see how a typical 100k hand run would look like. You can regenerate the graph several times just to see the different scenarios.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...rt=all&amp;vc=1 (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&amp;Number=8457727&amp;page=0&amp;fpart=all &amp;vc=1)

http://pokerfilz.50megs.com/

[/ QUOTE ]

this thing is pretty cool to mess around with, thanks for the links

[EMc]

[ QUOTE ]
Has this thread degraded into silliness and namecalling enough for it to be locked? It's way tl;dr.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. There was some good debate earlier, but it has degraded to that. Im a little embrassed.