Running well, and the inevitable reality check

[WCGRider]

Fair enough.

[SuperPokerJedi]

cross-link thread to Psychology

[CalledDownLight]

my theory: You will run really well in donkaments until you get 2 payout levels away from where the money really starts mattering. At this point you will go ice cold and never get dealt a hand and not be able to win allins even when getting it in ahead. Thats the reality check.

[diebitter]

[ QUOTE ]
there are those sessions where it feels like people own your soul. All your bluff c-bet/semibluffs get called or raised and when you do manage to hit something they either have you beat, fold, or suck out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This should be printed out and stuck under everyone's monitor.

Well said.

[Ironic]

WCGRider is a good player and also a really nice guy. When I created a topic about my low winrate I got a lot of mixed responses, people telling me to one thing other people telling me to do another thing. Rider said to me, listen, it is your aggression, increase your aggression and your game will improve. He looked at my hands, I took his advice and basically increased my aggression threefold and since the day I did that I have been doing great over the small-ish sample of hands I have played so far. Hopefully it will continue (I plan to play a lot more poker this week).

I don't want to put anyone's nose out of joint but I think some people who took a long time to reach NL200 are jealous of his rapid rise. I am just basing that on some of the remarks I have seen around here lately.

Keep it up dude.

[diebitter]

Yeah, he's okay, but I liked him a lot more before his post about how well he's doing.

Honestly, some of us know what 30K breakevens are like, and how it feels to have session after session where you feel like your cards are faceup. Only stuff like that can really make you appreciate the nature of variance, and able to spot running hot from playing hot.

[SimaoMacaco]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, he's okay, but I liked him a lot more before his post about how well he's doing.

Honestly, some of us know what 30K breakevens are like, and how it feels to have session after session where you feel like your cards are faceup. Only stuff like that can really make you appreciate the nature of variance, and able to spot running hot from playing hot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think part of learning the game is understanding the variance.. it does make you stronger and eventually its possible to end up indifferent to the variance.. but the first few times it hits you its a hard hard hit as an ego gets smashed, tilt sets in and the rolls starts decreasing.

Over the last 75k hands i got doomswitched out of 200nl thanks to a 12BI downswing started by -1200 in lost AI equity in around 2k hands, i tilted and ended up at 100nl where the tilt continued (overall down around -20BIs over 200nl and 100nl over 10k) and then i decided to play 50nl where i got my head back together over the next 25k hands. Playing 50nl was easy as the money was insignificant for my roll - i had around 100BIs at 50nl at that stage.

Then i had a baby and started at 100nl again, having been out of action for a long while i came back playing bad bad bad (wayyyy too tight and way to predicatable) so i went through a 20k break even spell at 100nl.. some re-evaulation has got this going sweet over the last 20k.

My point.. variance is huge.. variance and variance induced poor play is even bigger.. until you been through a bad spell its hard to explain.. people have said here "however bad you think your are running.. it can get worse" and that's true!! people have also said "you cannot believe how bad it is possible to run" and that is true too.. however bad you think variance can get.. it can get worse.

The point of this.. nothing really except to share some experience of variance.. i have around 250k+ hands logged now and am getting more of a long term view i think.. i ran super hot at the start and lucky too or else i would have quit. +++ If you have not run bad beyond belief you have a shock to come at some stage. Try to enjoy it as its a lesson when it comes. I know i am going to run worse than i ever thought possible again at some stage. I am just going to drop my ass down a few levels as quick as i can.. even is PokerEV tells me i am being out luck boxed.

[too eazy]

it's not jealousy.

he hasn't paid his dues yet.

it's simple really.

once you have $ you don't respect people for having $ you respect them for understanding the grind.

[seki]

So Rider, now that you're healthily rolled, are you going to pay back that coinflip kid you walked away from?

</offtopic>

The variance side of poker should convince everyone that if you're not having fun doing it, poker isn't for you. If you can't handle long stretches of time/hands of BR pain without enjoying a bit of it, poker isn't for you. If you let your good results as a poker player beef up your ego, or to talk down to other players, poker isn't for you (but you'll ignore me).

No one likes to lose money, and everyone gets pissed/disappointed, but I, for one enjoy the challenge of finding the bad players, reviewing my game, out-thinking my opponents, and finding those good decisions which are outside of ABC poker. Even in the bad times, if I can do those things well, I'll have had fun. Granted, I may have to step away from the table for a little while to realize it ;-)

[twoblacknines]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well said and is true, but the only real part i disagree with is putting in a time period on how long you can run bad for. I have no idea how many hands you play a day/week/month, but if someone plays about 5kish hands a day it would be very difficult for them to have a downswong for a month, or more then a week or two. Multiple month downswongs for a person like that would not be by chance.

But yeah the past has no effect on the future, so you can run good/bad for quite long.

[/ QUOTE ]

your post contradicts itself. You can run bad forever. End of story. The inverse is obviously also true.

[/ QUOTE ]

So some people regularly win simply because they are on a lifetime lucky streak while others (YOU, for example) regularly lose simply because they are on a lifetime losing streak that they will never "ride out?"

That sounds like stinkin' thinkin' to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

If this was true, then it throws out the entire poker is skill argument.