**Official uNL Microbrew thread: September**

[Berky]

hey could anyone give me a link to a good thread or somethign that explains PTH well?

Thanks guys.

[munkey]

whyzze

The problem is rate of change of winrate is 2nd derivative of winrate so requires even more sample size to converge I believe.

I speculate that there's a different kind of variance @ MSNL
and kind of merges in SSNL - FE increases up there and if you look @ the pokerev graphs thread especially teh dustbustr I think you'll see the difference.

In uNL we mostly win by having the better hands @ SD in bigger pots than villans rather than making them fold.

Hence value betting and Pokey's awesome recent post are so helpful to us.

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Pokey - I hope he's back for the winter.

[Mr_Pathetic]

The more open you are preflop the more likely you are to breakeven. The more rediculous you are postflop the more likely to breakeven for long time. So people like cts breaking even that long playing the way he does, spotting as many +EV spots as he does as marginally as he does it will happen. But I willing to bet no one in this forum can see all he can nor play as open as he does so therefore none of us should theoretically breakeven that long.

The more you suck the more you breakeven, I know this first hand from several breakeven stretches at NL2-NL10. I breakeven when I make stupid calls when I should have otherwise finished marginally ahead. And yes I have had several big downswings. I lost $78 at NL5 in two days buying in with just $6 (thats 12.8*6 or 15.6*5). I lost $110 at NL10 in two days. Both times there was at least 25% tilt involved. I have also broke even for 10-15k hands at all three limits and every single time I was NOT playing my best therefore prolonging my pain. As we all know its hard to lose that much at these levels as the play is really that bad but I did and I imagine at higher levels it would have been worse and at least 25%-40% of it would be MY fault.

Try going through every hand with a notebook with four columns Bad cards/mistakes Good Cards/Mistakes. Use stove and your knowledge to see what losses are cards and mistakes then divide mistakes/total and see what you get. When I downswing and tilt its never better then 75/25 and sometimes 60/40 and when I play great its 80/20 or less on losing hands. Winning hands are always below 90/10 but when losing its 90/10 on winners but while winning is 95/5. Start doing this EVERY session for EVERY hand 4xbb and up and you will quickly see how much you suck, I know I have.

[whyzze]

[ QUOTE ]
whyzze

The problem is rate of change of winrate is 2nd derivative of winrate so requires even more sample size to converge I believe.

I speculate that there's a different kind of variance @ MSNL
and kind of merges in SSNL - FE increases up there and if you look @ the pokerev graphs thread especially teh dustbustr I think you'll see the difference.

In uNL we mostly win by having the better hands @ SD in bigger pots than villans rather than making them fold.

Hence value betting and Pokey's awesome recent post are so helpful to us.

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Pokey - I hope he's back for the winter.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. I was just thinking and my post was basically explaining how it is impossible for anybody in this forum to have a 'true' winrate. You should be improving so its impossible. And if you manage to pull it off, then you aren't very good at poker.

If your rate is high enough then you would have moved up.
If its low, then you would have gone busto.
If you find out, you are a breakeven player and cant get any better and should find a new hobby.

I guess my point is to just strive to keep improving. Strive to get that extra bit of value..the more value you are getting the faster you can combat/get out of a breakeven.

[NL Newbie]

Winrates are retarded, that is all.

You know you should all drag the right side of "WINRATE" and "AMMOUNT" on pt over to the left to hide those stupid numbers.

Then you'll be playing non results orientated poker.

[netstorm]

@ Munkey:

Kanye stole that quote from me, Ive been using it for aprox. 8 years now [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] And thanks for the kind words

I really enjoy this discussion, although it shifted of somewhere from what I liked it to be. I didn't mean to go into winrates, although thats part of it.

Alot of arguments what you guys are saying are spot on. Yes, cts plays a lot higher variance style, and thus will have bigger swings. And yes, I agree, you will be playing worse during downswings, and make more mistakes, eventhough you dont realize it while you're playing. Not even if you go through your hands right after the session, because you will find an excuse for that play.

"he had been bluffing me for 3 hands, time to take a stance, too bad I ran into top set"

"I had a read goddamnit!"

"He's a donkey, Im allowed to 4bet my QQ on a T high flop!"


But then, after you forget those hands, and go back to your PT database, you see it. You sucked. And not just a little bit, nooooo! You were getting it allin with air vs. nits in 3 bets pot. You were 3barreling calling stations. You were... playing bad...

However, swings were you are playing correct happen to. They can happen in extreme forms. Now to the point I was trying to make:

Stop bitching when you just lost 5 BI's! Bigger swings can, and will happen. Thats not a guess, its a fact. Man up, look for your leaks, and plug them!

Im gonna stop now, Im just rambling on :-/

[C4LL4W4Y]

whyzze, i think what both netstorm and i were trying to say was that you can't get your 'true' winrate over a certain number, say 100k, of hands, albeit in much different ways.

and i disagree that if one has a winrate that remains stagnant, that he should give up the hobby. if you maintain 5-7ptbb/100 at 50nl over 100k hands while the games are continuously evolving (a point that i think you overlooked), i'd say you're doing a pretty decent job at that limit. yeah, most guys will move up before 100k...but some people need a rather stress-free, robotic approach to this game in order to cope with the everyday variance we all face.

[Gelford]

[ QUOTE ]

Then you'll be playing non results orientated poker.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yet you whine ten times a day ... ??? (Christ)

[netstorm]

[ QUOTE ]
whyzze, i think what both netstorm and i were trying to say was that you can't get your 'true' winrate over a certain number, say 100k, of hands, albeit in much different ways.

and i disagree that if one has a winrate that remains stagnant, that he should give up the hobby. if you maintain 5-7ptbb/100 at 50nl over 100k hands while the games are continuously evolving (a point that i think you overlooked), i'd say you're doing a pretty decent job at that limit. yeah, most guys will move up before 100k...but some people need a rather stress-free, robotic approach to this game in order to cope with the everyday variance we all face.

[/ QUOTE ]

SSDEX and gelford come to mind. These two guys have been raping uNL / SSNL for 100's of K's of hands

[munkey]

[ QUOTE ]

I agree with you. I was just thinking and my post was basically explaining how it is impossible for anybody in this forum to have a 'true' winrate. You should be improving so its impossible. And if you manage to pull it off, then you aren't very good at poker.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you about the 'true' winrate thing. I basically l think it's one of the most pored over stats despite it's variance. I agree as long as you're getting better and making $$$ then all is good.

Given the number of posters here there exists a chance that someone will have a horrendous time regardless of their skill [BTW see koms' graph]- it's why I can't decide if fgators is the greatest gimmick account ever or the unluckiest regular [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]