Question on Variance & judging your play
 

Have been running the worst i ever have in MTT's. Here's my question. I can deal with getting rivered over and over and over and losing flips over and over, that's variance. However, I was wondering, when reviewing HH's and how you played, if you look at your session and find you were playing tad nitty but getting it in good 80% of the time, worst case just barely behind with multilple draws and overcards. Just because you are "getting it in good a lot", does that mean you are actually playing well and variance is just sticking its ugly black head out? or is it possible I am getting it in good, just in the wrong spots? I feel like if I'm going to be rivered, it doesn't really matter where you get it in, unless you get all the money in on fifth street drawing completely dead. Would like to hear successful players who turn a profit in this game opinions. Thanks.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

Does one play good if you allways fold and only play AA when blinded down to 1 big blind and you lose while getting it in good?

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

the best thing for you in this situation is peer review. the capacity to critically (and objectively) evaluate your own play is pretty rare, so you really need someone on the outside who can be like "i really think you missed a spot here" or "i think this is spew."

i had a two month stretch this past spring where i basically just lost money in MTTs, playing decent (but not deeb-like) volume. the best thing for me at that time was to constantly be talking to other people who i knew were very good at this game, and be like "what can i be doing differently? how can i get better?"

but yeah man, MTTs are a real mindfuck. the variance is insane, probably worse than any of us successful players can appreciate, because so many of us have been running near the top of the bell curve. so when you're playing a game where it's possible to run bad for so long, it's almost impossible to not stop during those bad stretches and be like "i don't even know if i'm a winning player." and of course the sort of "theoretical bounds" of MTT variance are such that you might never know. so, the best thing to do is just to try to surround yourself with other players who you consider to be intelligent, critical thinkers, who can help you not only improve but make sure you don't "fix" leaks that don't exist.

but you're definitely right in the basic notion that simply getting it in good a lot does not necessarily mean you're a winning player. it could definitely mean you're missing profitable, aggressive spots. but it's going to be really hard to judge that for yourself, as if you're continually missing those spots, it's probably because you don't recognize them in the first place.

i'm rambling. hope this was helpful. moral of the story: talk to other players you think are good/smart. don't get complacent. but don't overestimate your own self-evaluation skills. objective observers/critics with different experience/skillsets are invaluable.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

being a decent nit will make you a winner at at least mid stakes mtt's and some higher stakes buy ins (not like 100 rebuys). u have to be good though, being a nit doesnt mean you will be a winner if your not picking up chips in smaller pots as well. Just look @ fgators

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
the best thing for you in this situation is peer review. the capacity to critically (and objectively) evaluate your own play is pretty rare, so you really need someone on the outside who can be like "i really think you missed a spot here" or "i think this is spew."

i had a two month stretch this past spring where i basically just lost money in MTTs, playing decent (but not deeb-like) volume. the best thing for me at that time was to constantly be talking to other people who i knew were very good at this game, and be like "what can i be doing differently? how can i get better?"

but yeah man, MTTs are a real mindfuck. the variance is insane, probably worse than any of us successful players can appreciate, because so many of us have been running near the top of the bell curve. so when you're playing a game where it's possible to run bad for so long, it's almost impossible to not stop during those bad stretches and be like "i don't even know if i'm a winning player." and of course the sort of "theoretical bounds" of MTT variance are such that you might never know. so, the best thing to do is just to try to surround yourself with other players who you consider to be intelligent, critical thinkers, who can help you not only improve but make sure you don't "fix" leaks that don't exist.

but you're definitely right in the basic notion that simply getting it in good a lot does not necessarily mean you're a winning player. it could definitely mean you're missing profitable, aggressive spots. but it's going to be really hard to judge that for yourself, as if you're continually missing those spots, it's probably because you don't recognize them in the first place.

i'm rambling. hope this was helpful. moral of the story: talk to other players you think are good/smart. don't get complacent. but don't overestimate your own self-evaluation skills. objective observers/critics with different experience/skillsets are invaluable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mlagoo, thank you for this, seriously... Problem w/ the first part is it seems that all the truly accomplished people here seem to already know each other and it's kinda cliqueish...

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

Basically to reach the final table and to win a turnament you need to get some amount of luck. Just keep getting it in with the best hand and you will win the hand most times.

Remember even if you are twice as good as the players in the tournament you play and its 500 players in those turnemants you should only on average get to the final table once every 500 / 2 / 10 = 25th time you play the tournament.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

Yeah I don't agree with that logic at all. You cannot group all 5 of those all ins together as each is a seperate entity.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this wrong? If in each of them you're all-in (like the post states), then the probability you will not win all of "n" such occurances is 1-(0.8)^n. You will win 3 such all-ins in a row only 51% of the time, four 41% of the time, and 5 only 33% of the time.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this wrong? If in each of them you're all-in (like the post states), then the probability you will not win all of "n" such occurances is 1-(0.8)^n. You will win 3 such all-ins in a row only 51% of the time, four 41% of the time, and 5 only 33% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, if you're involved in 5 all-ins for your tourney life, it means that you have already won the first 4.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this wrong? If in each of them you're all-in (like the post states), then the probability you will not win all of "n" such occurances is 1-(0.8)^n. You will win 3 such all-ins in a row only 51% of the time, four 41% of the time, and 5 only 33% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, if you're involved in 5 all-ins for your tourney life, it means that you have already won the first 4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shrug, I guess if it's just a semantic issue then fine.
A better way to word it then would have been, "If you always get all-in for your tournament life as an 80% favorite, you'll be out 2/3 of the time before your 6th all-in."

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
Does one play good if you allways fold and only play AA when blinded down to 1 big blind and you lose while getting it in good?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, i definitely consider myself a student of the game, i started playing micro stakes and have read every book watched every show, blah blah blah. I strongly believe my fundamentals are strong (therefore not making giant mistakes like blinding myself down etc.) I also consider myself a thinking player (not just playing my cards, but playing the person, the table dynamics, antes/blind levels, money bubble) I have been reviewing my HH's and am starting to realize you need to win flips and small edge situations in deep stages of MTT's to be successful as well. I play a nitty style in the lower buy in levels becuz people tend to just want to give you chips. There is no pushing ace-rag off a A-J-K flop with a open ended str8 flush draw or hands of that sort.

I joined card runners and hopefully their videos will help me substantially. But clearly, I think if i just try to make the best decision I can on every street which results in getting my money "in good". That is all I can do.

I think this is kinda a good topic tho, does anyone else have any ideas or opinions on if getting your money in good a large percentage of the time truly makes you a winning player. Some winning players who tend to be aggro accumulators will tell you they got all the way to the final table showing their cards no more than 5 times. Is there an advantage to both styles?

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even if you get it in as an 80% favorite every time - you will still get outdrawn 20% of the time. So if you are involved in 5 of these in a large turnament and all is for your life - you will statistical on average be out of the tournament.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is this wrong? If in each of them you're all-in (like the post states), then the probability you will not win all of "n" such occurances is 1-(0.8)^n. You will win 3 such all-ins in a row only 51% of the time, four 41% of the time, and 5 only 33% of the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically, if you're involved in 5 all-ins for your tourney life, it means that you have already won the first 4.

[/ QUOTE ]


^^^^This is why. That was the point. I realize now that he did qualify that they are all for your "life". So I take it back, the statement isn't wrong, but in practice it is unlikely.

Sherman

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

You're still kind of focussing on the wrong thing if I understand you correctly. Good tournament play often means putting in your money in situations where you'll almost certainly have the worst of it if you get called. I can't recommend much more than studying the MTT forums and asking questions where appropriate ; and for tournaments, I think PokerXFactor is your best bet, you can play back HHs without paying the subscription, check out the stickied thread in SSMTT.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

I've been in the same spot lately so I know how you feel. I'm pretty sure I'm a winning player, but this year has been pretty terrible for me. I haven't put in a lot of volume or anything, but I've really started to question whether I'm actually a winning player. I'm sure part of it is running bad, and part of it is bad play, and I feel like my solution is finding some people to swap HHs with, which is something I've neglected to do/been putting off. Also, I think a big part of my problem has been just lack of concentration, I'm pretty sure if I played with as much thought as I put into responding to threads in SSMTT then I would be doing better.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

Really nice topic and i feel the same way. Its not just about losing flips tho. When you lose flips , you can at least see if you ve made the right play or not, however its way more complicated then that.

Let's say you 3-bet light or bluff bet the river. You are gona get called and lose some % of a time. Lets say villain is pretty unknown and you need him to fold 60% of a time to make this play profitable. When you run bad and get called a lot in this spot you start tightening up and in turn passing up the +EV spots, because you start thinking he folds less then 60 here.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

MTTs are insanely mentally draining and I feel like I could write a 5 page rant about this but I'm too lazy at the moment.

MTT variance has made me the nutjob I am today.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

i can take everything except late in tournment, people gamble with very unlikely cards for all their stack, and hit hard.
i can never understand the call with 34-47 sooted or 22-55.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
MTTs are insanely mentally draining and I feel like I could write a 5 page rant about this but I'm too lazy at the moment.

MTT variance has made me the nutjob I am today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
MTTs are insanely mentally draining and I feel like I could write a 5 page rant about this but I'm too lazy at the moment.

MTT variance has made me the nutjob I am today.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

I would estimate the avg online tournament as a minimum of 95% luck.

Re: Question on Variance & judging your play
 

[ QUOTE ]
You're still kind of focussing on the wrong thing if I understand you correctly. Good tournament play often means putting in your money in situations where you'll almost certainly have the worst of it if you get called. I can't recommend much more than studying the MTT forums and asking questions where appropriate ; and for tournaments, I think PokerXFactor is your best bet, you can play back HHs without paying the subscription, check out the stickied thread in SSMTT.

[/ QUOTE ]

word...the tournaments where someone calls me a donkey, are usually the ones where I am playing good