Re: Downswings.
[ QUOTE ]
therefore i believe these huge downswings are NOT inevitable like most believe. the problem is that its so difficult to reverse course during it
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the problem is most people haven't had downswings like that. A lot of players on the top haven't even played a million hands (not to mention live players who play 10x less), it's hard to imagine that some of them should have a 100k hand downswing. Which makes me think there is long-term luck that could determine that one guy plays nosebleed stakes, the other grinds on 5/10.
Like for example, when I read the well with sbrugby I was under the impression he didn't realise how fortunate he was to be able to move up the ladder so fast without much difficulties. I'm sure the fact he got there is no fluke, since he's approach to the game is phenomenal, but how fast he did it had a lot to do w/ variance and I know he frowned upon that idea/got pissed when people told him that. While I have an immense respect for him as a player (moreso than for any other) I think he never faced a huge downswing and his views on variance were a bit skewed. Until now I guess. Must suck to have your first one in the millions.
I have a friend who was a well respected 10/20 25/50 winner with excellent tilt control. He has been losing for over a year now despite moving all the way down to 3/6. He claims that it's possible the run worse than 99,9% think possible. I think it's possible in a sense that if we're talking about a 100k sample, people haven't played really that much more overall (I'd assume less than 1 out of 10 have played over a million on this HSNL forum), so long-term variance might differ from player to player.
I hope this doesn't sound like a "I run worse than anyone" story, because I don't want it to be that way. I'm very much open to different opinions (especially from the best players this forum has to offer) and appreciate your posts.
|