Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

The 20 buyin roll:
This is about as aggressive a bankroll plan I would recommend outside of taking shots, you will also need to be moving up and down in limits on a regular basis because losing 5 buyins is a pretty regular occurrence in HUSNG. Mathematically I think this is the ideal kind of bankroll from moving from the lowest limits to the 220s as quick as possible (I am targeting you players who are trying to move up because generally you are the ones using this BR plan), moving down anytime you have 15 buyins and up anytime you have 20 buyins for the next level. In reality this will work for a very small percentage of people and incorrectly using this kind of roll is how most people bust their bankrolls. I think the easiest way to describe someone who should use this strategy is by describing what characteristics in yourself should dissuade you from choosing this plan:

-You have an ego related to poker, I dont care if your confident but if you find your ego EVER interfering with making rational poker related decisions this is a dangerous plan to be using. Some symptoms include having trouble moving down when necessary, excessive chatting with "stupid fish" and having trouble quitting sessions a loser.
-Tilt, if you are at all prone to tilt, do yourself a favor and pick a much more conservative plan theres no space for tilt with a plan this aggressive. Playing with a 20 buyin roll with tilt issues will take longer to move up than being more conservative and having the same issues IMO.
-You dont have a stable life, if anything significant is going on in your life and you havent experienced it while playing poker seriously before its unlikely you know how you are going to react to it in terms of your play. In this category I would include partying, moving, going pro, break-ups, and your general personality. If there is a dynamic difference between your play one day to the next this describes you.
-Small psychological roll this can mean all sorts of things, for some people its an actual number (like losing $1000 in a day just hurts some people no matter how much $ they have) but this comes in all shapes and forms and is probably the most determining factor in what kind of BR plan you can use.
If losing 5 buyins affects your ability to play well in the future (or you desire to play at all) most likely your psychological roll has been breached.
-You are learning, no need to move up faster than your knowledge will allow you, going from the $10s to $220s quickly is not going to happen without you needing to learn and adjust. If you breeze through a couple limits fast I would recommend slowing down a bit just to see how you adjust to the better play at higher limits.

Theres a lot of things people ignore when making bankroll decisions, has a thought process along these lines ever entered your thoughts?
"Gee if I take $500 and play the $100 HUSNGs I could move up permanently and if I lose meh, its just $500"
Its important to realize in this situation that you are not just risking $500 but you are risking FAILING which could have a lot of other psychological affects. In my experience failure can cause you to:
-Stop playing
-Play even more
-Not move down after losing $500
-Gamble more to get out of the 'hole'
-Make you unhappy outside of poker

This is essentially what you risk when you play with a 20 buyin roll because you will have to be constantly adjusting which level is appropriate to play based on your widely varying bankroll. Not to mention the qualities necessary to handle yourself under the kind of pressure that having 20 buyins will put you under are quite rare, personally I do NOT have all characteristics to handle this pressure and I am a very stable person. If your goal really is to move up as fast as possible its unlikely using a 20 buyin BR plan will accomplish this the quickest. Now anything can happen in poker BUT if you want to give yourself the best possible chance of building a bankroll to play at the 220s I would recommend choosing a different BR plan.
Cwar

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Thumbs up.

Edit: Is 100 BIs excessive, even for a nit?

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

This is a very good post.

Personally I like a bigger bankroll than that. 50, even 100 times the buyin. It's not so much a variance thing but a psychological thing. Losing 5 games in a row with 100x the buyin doesn't have close to the affect it does when you aren't properly rolled. Choose a bankroll that suits you.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I play my regular level with 30-60 buyins, depending on how I've been running/if I've just moved up.

I game select and/or purchase % from select people with as low as 20 buyins, but almost half the time this is in regular speed games, thus the edge is greater/variance lower.

Moving up from 5s-33s I used 20-30 buyins, the closest I ever came to busting was my first two weeks, I knew relatively little about husngs and lost half my br.

Since the 33s I've stuck with 30 buyins minimum.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I agree that 20 buy-ins is very aggressive and have always wondered why it is the default move up level. What do you think of a learning player moving up with 25 buy-ins and down with 15?

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

If you don't suffer that much from tilt , then you are safe playing with 20 buy-ins . As long as you're willing to move up or down when required .

A player with 20 buy-ins and doesn't suffer much from tilt will have a risk of ruin of 1% , even with a win rate of 56% .

So as Cwar pointed out , some players are more affected by tilt and may need more than 20 buy-ins . Also , as you move up in limits your win rate should decline so you would need to increase your bankroll to compensate for this .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Thank you cwar, finally a real answer to this.

ciao.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Nh, Sir

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Just because I like you, I won't dig up the old statistical runs showing just how much potential value you're passing up on by waiting for even "just" 20 buyins, and how little security you're really buying by doing so.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Personally, I think waiting for 20 buyins to move up to any level you're likely to be a winner at is *massively* -EV, at least up through $50s, but my opinion has been voiced in great detail in the past, so there's no need to repeat it all here.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

only 20 buy-ins? hell i should be playing the 10Ks then:)

(thinly veiled brag post obv)

Indy

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Guess I better include my standard disclaimer. I firmly believe 20 is way too many when trying to quickly and agressively build a roll (and have shown in the past that it can make as much as a 3x difference in your final bankroll over 1k games, while buying *very little* extra bust security), but once you get past that phase, 20 is certainly not enough, especially if you're paying bills out of your roll.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Your goal in poker is to maximize your long term profits and not to minimize your risk of busting out . So as Tnixon pointed out ( we agree this time? ) , it can be detrimental to your long term profits if you wait too long to move up in limits .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I think the only part we disagree on is what "too long" means.

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

You math guys tend to ignore psychology too much.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
You math guys tend to ignore psychology too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nicho , you should post this topic in the probability forum if you'd like . They wouldn't take you seriously if you suggest having 50 buy-ins for heads up sng's . In fact , you would get flamed for it .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
You math guys tend to ignore psychology too much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. But in all my previous posts on the topic of bankroll building (and there have been some whoppers), I have actually tried really hard to take psychology, and even learning periods into account, or at the very least clearly point out that I was purely presenting a statistical view of things.

It is really hard to quantify things like "tilt", "confidence", and "comfort" though. All you can do is mention that they do have some (potentially very large) effect.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I take responsibility for re-opening this wound.

Here is the breakdown for other games.

FRlimit: 300BB
6max limit: 800 BB
NL FR 15-20 bi
NL 6 max 25 bi
STT: 50 bi
MTT: 100 bi

This DOES include times you tilt, it DOES include times that you run bad, this is all registered under "normalcy."

We all know that there is a place that the unfortunate 5% experience. If you look at the HSL forum, you will see a post by Hobb that shows how he experienced more than a 1000 BB downswing. It is unusual for a winning player to go through 200K hand break-even streaks, but it does happen. We would say to a newbie, that you are "probably" not a winning player, but that thread, and experiences by other's, shows that it can happen.

I wrote a post in the LC forum if you haven't read it addressing "what is normal." Are my experiences able to be filed under "normalcy." If they are then I don't need to change anything. If they are not, then I am either running bad (improbable) or playing bad (more likely). I think that it is important to know this for my own sake.

So, I asked, what have people ACTUALLY DONE to build their rolls. I admit that I am under-rolled, and that I am attempting to balance aggressive building with an acceptable ROR. I, historically, have always taken about 5%, which is considered too much by many people.

Have I ever experience an abnormal swing? I attempted to play 6max limit, and dropped over 600 BB in three days. Is it normal to run at -15BB/100? Absolutely not. I know that I played better than that. At LEAST break-even, for crying out loud.

Things that I also don't know. Does a LAG or TAG style add to swings in a SNG? I know that in FR Limit, I took constant, but very small, swings, but I was not playing LAG.

The thing I am trying to figure out, is how to think about normalcy. If I am playing a game I am familiar with, I have no doubt in my mind of whether I am running good, or running bad. I know how to adjust not only my play, but my mind to grind through those swings. I also know that if I am losing money faster than normal, or going through wide swings, that I need to step back and evaluate. I can only ask myself: Do you honestly believe that you are playing your very very best. If I cannot answer yes to that, then I know that I should probably stop playing for while and regroup. If I answer yes to that, I then decide if I feel like playing more. Is my ego bruised over this? A little, but I would rather have my roll intact, and I will thank myself in the morning.

"In poker, anything can happen" is thrown around a lot. It bothers me on an intellectual and emotional level that I am struggling to move up as much as I am. It was for this that I wrote that post. I am attempting to wrap my mind around a game structure with properties that I am not familiar with, because I look at my stats, that can't lie to me, and something does not add up, and I asked, out of frustration (and a bruised Ego, if you will) what is going so wrong.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I want to add that there does need to be a certain amount of confidence in your own game when you are playing on the minimum stake. When I was playing limit, there was more than one time that I found myself with less than 20BBs, but that is the risk you take when you decide to glide with 300BBs.

I think it is the moving up and down feature, and the artificial cap on losses that confuse many players of HUSNGs, and that is why no one has any conclusive mathematical structure for moving up and down. I imagine I am not the only person on this forum who has moved up and down through the levels.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Dave ,you may use the kelly criterion as a way to determine when you should move up or down in limits . I was thinking about creating a thread on this but I think I would lose a few people and the thread would probably be uninteresting to most .

I get the feeling that not many readers of the heads up forum are interested in the math associated with bankroll management .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
So, I asked, what have people ACTUALLY DONE to build their rolls.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, starting with a roll of about $20, somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 or 9 months ago, over 6000 games, I have yet to go bust playing heads-up using a 5-10 buyin rule. I only played 5 buyins in a recent drop to $5 tables, though, because I figured I'd be much happier and better off redepositing $100 than grinding it out at the $2s. The first time I went through the $5s, when I was still trying to figure out how to not totally suck, which took me probably a lot longer than most people, I played 10 buyins.

I've been in the range where I could play $100-$200 sngs a number of times, and slowed down my rule for anything over $50, wanting 15 buyins instead of 10, and even then I was table-selecting pretty heavily with sharkscope. Lately I've been getting hammered every time I get back to the $50 range, so I've adjusted a little bit there, and am waiting for 13 buyins to play 50s.

I have had to redeposit a couple times (but not recently, not even after experiencing a $3k downswing which was most of what I had in my account), but only because I seem to do much more poorly at anything that's not a HUSNG. Just to give you an idea of how badly I do at everything else, sharkscope currently shows me with about $6k profit from HUSNGs, but my actual bankroll is just under $600. I've cashed out a total of somewhere around $2500, but I've also had a couple decent MTT wins, for about $1600 total I think, so that really only accounts for about $900.

Apparently SNGs (I also show a profit at 9 person sngs, with a much better overall ROI, but I don't play those as much) are funding some very bad gambling habits at other forms of poker, such as getting crushed for like 6 buyins at $100NLHU a couple weeks ago, and a very similar drop recently at 6max.

My player name is T28333, if you want to have a gander at my sharkscope graph. It's pretty helter-skelter and all over the place, though, with big runs of nearly breaking even, punctuated by big gains and (usually smaller) drops. If the future follows the past patterns, then I'm due to start a big spike upwards in the next couple hundred games. (If only that particular gambler's fallacy were true) [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

And that's what I've actually done.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Forgot about Kelly Criterion. The problem I have with it, and I believe TNixon's theory closely resembled full Kelly. Is that you are not able to know if your numbers will be true. It is a different ball-game than Economics, where your expectations can be calculated with more accuracy.

I have several WRs: 2,5,6,10,11,20, my over-all for turbos, my over all for regulars, and my over-all. Even if I decided to use strictly my WR for regulars, because of my sample size, I am not able to determine what my real WR is. I know that my over-all does not reflect what should be happening. But most importantly, I cannot determine what will happen to the WR when I move up to the next level. I could do some number finagling and just assume that I am winning 53% to show the absolute max I need.. interesting.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

This is why it's good to use half-kelly because many people tend to over-estimate their win rates . Tnixons approach closely resembles full Kelly bets but it can be risky if you over-estimate . In fact , your long term bankroll growth rate will plummet to zero in the long run if you bet higher than full kelly .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I actually figured out Kelly Criterion to see how it compared to my bankroll simulator at one point, and it has you playing more aggressively than 10 buyins, right around 7 buyins for a 58% winrate.

Now that cwar's "play patient" thread has been almost fully derailed, here's a link back to the thread where I posted the first results from a bankroll simulator I wrote.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=2&vc=1

One thing to be careful of is that the first iteration was confusing. Step up buyin amounts were for the next level, and step down amounts were for the previous level. Since then, I've refined it, and it seems that stepping up with 10 and back down with 7 (so when you lose 3 buyins at the higher level) is pretty close to optimal, while retaining a very low risk of ruin. Somewhere around 7/7 is truly optimal (and matches the Kelly Criterion for 58%, which is where I baselined the simulator), but the small amount of extra value you get there comes at the price of what I considered too high of a chance of busting. The original simulation was for a starting point of $20 as well. If you start with $100 instead, your odds of surviving 1000 games without going bust, playing 10/7, are 98.68%. It's very easy to end up with less than a 1% chance of going bust without losing too much value by slightly modifying that to 11/8 or 11/9.

I've made quite a few posts on this topic, including a modification to the bankroll simulator where I tried to take a learning period into account, starting your winrate for a particular level at less than 50%, and increasing it a small amount for each game played up to a specified maximum. A search should tag them all.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
Tnixons approach closely resembles full Kelly bets but it can be risky if you over-estimate .

[/ QUOTE ]
It's more like around 70% Kelly for a 58% winrate.

For a 56% winrate, I'd probably want to do something closer to 15/12, where full kelly would be more like 10.

For a 53% winrate, you can't get over a 95% survival rate over 1k games (and I was really looking for 98.5% or higher) unless you start with at least $200 *and* play 30/20. And the resulting bankroll after 1k games is pretty pitiful. You win about $40, and probably only very rarely make it out of the $20s.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I've been building a roll playing 4 person HUSNGS using a 25BI rule.

Gone from 290 (which I built up from $1 playing cash games) to 643 playing HUSNGS (Playing the $20s now).

Should I switch to a 15BI BR managment system?

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

I prefer to err on the conservative side when estimating my win rate .

So using full kelly , we would invest f=[p*(v+1)-1]/v
where v is your v-to-one odds received on the wager , v= 0.9523:1

So if we use p=58% , we would risk [.58*(1.9523)-1]/0.9523 = 13.896% of our bankroll on each individual gamble . So using half-kelly we would risk about 7% of our bankroll which still maintains a high bankroll growth rate without as much volatility .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been building a roll playing 4 person HUSNGS using a 25BI rule.



[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds good if you have a high ROI playing in them .

Your variance is higher in 4-mans and your bankroll should compensate for this .

So if your ROI for a 4-man tourney is ~ 35% , and a s.d of ~ 1.93 then B = -*1/2*s.d^2/ROI*lnr where r=1%

B= ~ 25 buy-ins .

So there is a 1% chance you will bust at some point . The most difficult part is determining your true win rate . This is why it's better you err on the conservative side and you may choose more than 25 buy-ins unless you've been doing this for a very long time .

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

If I could just post results like this every time I played, the number of buyins I have would be such an irrelevant concern:

2 player $30: 82.35% (14/17) ROI: 56.86% Total profit: $304.50
2 player $50: 71.43% (5/7) ROI: 36.05% Total profit: $132.50

All games: 79.17% (19/24) ROI: 48.39 Profit: 437

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

jay shark and TNixon you are both very logical people and I think what you are overlooking is that a lot of people cant think the way you do, myself included. It would be great if everyone could jump up and down in limits and keep playing winning poker but that most definitely is not reality, often times the psychological factors I discussed in this article can lead to not playing winning poker for a very extended period of time or even force players out of poker completely.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
It would be great if everyone could jump up and down in limits and keep playing winning poker but that most definitely is not reality, often times the psychological factors I discussed in this article can lead to not playing winning poker for a very extended period of time or even force players out of poker completely.

[/ QUOTE ]

While this is absolutely true, you should not be recommending that those people play with 20 buyins. 20 isn't nearly enough for somebody who doesn't have at least some sort of grasp on the psychological issues. (perfection is not required, but introspection definitely is)

What you should be recommending is that they avoid heads-up poker like the plague.

Er, wait a minute. I think you'd be chasing off every single person who I can actually beat heads-up if you did that.

Nevermind, ignore me. These are not the droids you're looking for.

Isn't the weather lovely today?

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
you should not be recommending that those people play with 20 buyins.

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you read the title of the article? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

er, yeah. duh. lol

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
only 20 buy-ins? hell i should be playing the 10Ks then:)

(thinly veiled brag post obv)

Indy

[/ QUOTE ]

Really not that thin [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

I play HUSNGs with much more than 20 buyins because I play other games; also, HUSNGs, of all the poker games, have the greatest potential to get under my skin. When you run bad, you are going to have to deal with being DOWN 2:1 a lot of the time. It's totally unpleasant, but if you stick with it, you can learn a lot about how to play the "short stack." Still unpleasant though. Climbing from 1K chips to 3K chips at 20/40 is a long road.

You will have to make a lot of tough decisions as to whether to push/raise/fold at awkward stacks - say you're stack is 740 and the blinds or 40/80. Totally different from cash whereas you can simply reload. Unpleasant decisions lie ahead.

HUSNGs are intensely psychological. Try losing three or four of them in a row and then going up against ONE person where you have to make a decision on every hand to win or lose a blind. And then you are down 2:1 again. Or up to 2:1 but then lose all-in preflop AJ v. A9. And now you are down 2:1.

I'm a winner in HUSNGs, but I've stopped playing for a while just because I think I lost like 6 out of my last 10 or something and was just tired of them. Not on a tilt or anything, just needed to move on to another game. Too many awkward stack situations and not enough players to protect me from being impatient.

So, if you are going to focus on HUSNGs, proceed with caution. Of all the forms of poker I've played, it puts you the closest to both your opponent and your own psychological underpinnings.

Barry

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Someone asked if your style of play (LAG vs. TAG) affects your variance in HUSnGs. And the answer is that it doesn´t. Your winrate is the only thing that matters on variance in HUSnGs. One style may yield a higher winrate than the other, though.

I have looked a little into this Kelly criterion and it is interesting, but I have some questions about it.

1) Winrates are not constant in HUSnGs. They increase if your bankroll decreases (you are forced to play lower and easier levels). And they decrease if your bankroll increases (you move up to higher and harder levels, until you reach your most profitable level and then you won´t move further up no matter how big your bankroll becomes).

It seems to me the Kelly criterion is not designed to take that into account, and that it is thus recommending a too aggressive bankroll-strategy.

What do you think?

2) If the Kelly criterion recommends a too aggressive bankroll-strategy, can anyone make a modified formula to fix that?

3) If the Kelly criterion doesn´t recommend a too aggressive bankroll-strategy, can anyone make a formula where the uncertainty of the winrate is included?

(I mean include the standard deviation and the number of games played at that particular level so you can safely use a full criterion which takes uncertainty of winrate into consideration instead of resorting to the half-assed half criterion)

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

TNixon:

I have also been using the 10 bi rule over the past 300+ games. Pretty much every time, I move up, I get smacked. Take last week, I was down to $10, ran up to ~250, then ate a 16 bi downer, so back to playing the fives again.

In a previous post about br management (one of like 50, right?), you stated that you think it is abnormal for a player to experience multiple 7+ bi downswings. Is there anyway that you can show in your simulation how many downswings a person should experience in x many games. Is it normal to run

wwwwwwwwwwllllllllllllllllllwwwwwwwwlllllllllwlwlw lwwwwlwww

while having a 58% wr? I know the above looks silly, but that is honestly how I run. If it's psychology based, I must be the worlds best poker player, and I know that's not the truth.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

thats quite a good post, nh cwar.

Im playing with 100 buy-ins, but im really a br nit.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

You got me thinking with that post Dave. I bet that's the norm and the swings in HU poker (due to psychology/tilt) are bigger than they would be if you were just flipping coins.

Let's do a little experiment. Find your win rate in games where you lost the previous match and compare it to your winrate when you won the previous match. (use every match - no selection bias). If you're a robot, they should be the same over a long sample. But of course, my bet is that most people have better win rates after wins and are worse after losses.

If we all do this, we can can sort of quantify tilt, and how much you are likely to experience (even if you don't think you ever tilt).

I'm gonna look this up and post it when I get home.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

Well, unfortunately, wwwwwwlllll is just as likely wlwlwlwlwlw.

It sucks that the losses are coming at just the wrong times, but if you're analyzing your play, and taking into account the fact that the players are going to be at least slightly better at the higher level (although to be honest, there's probably not a huge difference between your average $5 player and your average $10 player), then it's just a matter of time. 58% is more than enough that you'll get through the next level at some point.

One thing I do know from personal experience is that it's *very* difficult to still be playing good poker after a string of 5 or 6 losses. Even if you don't feel like you're playing poorly, you might be adding a little extra oomph to the downswings.

I was having a similar experience moving from $30s to $50s trying to play 10 buyins. I'd get up to the fifties, lose a couple in a row, and have to move back down. Last night I finally broke solidly through. After winning 7 $30s in a row, I had 14 or 15 buyins for $50s, and lost 2 of my first 3 $50s, but had enough to keep playing, and ended up at 60% in the $50s for the night, over 15 or 16 games or something.

Whatever bankroll rule you're using, there is a very real statistical advantage to leaving yourself enough room to play a few games at the higher level before moving back down. So if you're moving up at 10, move back down at 7. Or if you move up at 15, don't move back down until you hit 10.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]
you stated that you think it is abnormal for a player to experience multiple 7+ bi downswings

[/ QUOTE ]
This happens to me multiple times in a week, I wouldnt call it rare at all.

Re: Why You Shouldnt Play HUSNG with 20 Buyins
 

[ QUOTE ]

Let's do a little experiment. Find your win rate in games where you lost the previous match and compare it to your winrate when you won the previous match. (use every match - no selection bias). If you're a robot, they should be the same over a long sample. But of course, my bet is that most people have better win rates after wins and are worse after losses.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is the first 200 or so games for me, this is when I first started playing HUSNGs, so perhaps these numbers don't reflect what I should be doing now.

lwlwlwwllwwwwwwwwlwwwlwlwwwwllwwwwlwwlwwlllwwlll
wwwlwllwwwwlllwwlwwwllwlwwllwlwlwwlwwwwllwwwwlwl
wlllwwwlwlllwllwllwwlllllwwlwwwllwlwllllwwwwwwwwl
wlwwllwlllwllwlwwlwlwlwlwlllwwwwllwlllwlwlwwwwlwl
lllwwlwllllllwwlwllllwwlllll

Here are the last 100 games or so.

wlwllwwwlwwwwwwlwwwllwwwwlllwwlllllwlwwl
wlllllwllllllwwlwlwllwwwllwwwwwwwllwwlll
llwwwlwwlwwllllwwlwllllwwlwl

the first sample:

w:115
l:108
Sequences:
ww: 58
ll: 48
lw: 55
wl: 56

Sample 2:
w:54
l: 54
Sequence:
ww: 30
ll: 30
wl: 24
lw: 22

Incredibly, my career has been bookended by two break-even stretches. Go figure. The bright side is that it makes the math easier.