Big Loss in One Session

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
50 Big Bets is a very large loss in a single live session.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, no, it really isn't. But it can be daunting if you haven't done it that much or if you're used to leaving after losing 30BBs(per annie duke rule). It is a pain threshold, actually. Took me awhile to get used to it.

[ QUOTE ]
But isn't it easier for a good player to have a bigger win rate and lower variance live?

[/ QUOTE ]

The bigger the win rate comes with a higher variance level. Which also comes with aggression. It took me awhile to actually grasp that.

Game texture also comes into play. You'll have lower variance in a tighter game than a looser one. The more people see the flop, the higher your winrate will be, but your swings will be bigger.

b

[HOWMANY]

I lost $800 playing live 8/16 yesterday in a 9 hour session and I've had quite a few similar losses and it hasn't stopped me from being a pretty solid winner, although I only have a little over 250 hours in this game. When I started playing 20/40, after my first two or three sessions I was down 2k and now I'm up a decent amount, but sample size is smaller than 8/16. You can definitely lose for a couple sessions and be a winning player in the game.

[iggymcfly]

I was playing 15/30 live on Tuesday. I got down $1900 (>60 BB), didn't tilt at all, and came back to post a winning session. It took 12 hours, but I did it. It's certainly, very possible to post a 50 BB losing session without doing anything wrong in a live setting. It's tremendously frustrating when it happens, but if you really know you're playing well, it will turn around in the long run.

Playing on the internet, I've had streaks that were much longer than that (-400 BB over a month at one point), despite being a winner in the long-term. Basically, luck plays a lot bigger factor in your short-term results than most people believe or would like to admit. If you know you're consistently playing better than your opponents, just keep chipping away.

[Rbower]

I've been subcribing to Card Player for about a year and my favorite column is Bob Ciaffone's. He gives straight forward good advice. My girl fiance thinks I'm nuts for buying so many poker books, but after your post I need to add that one to the list.

[Rbower]

I started to write girl friend and then changed it too fiance in my last post. I wasn't trying to say that I am engaged to a girl I just read it and it sounds funny. She is female.

[Rbower]

Yes, I agree I may play too loose. Please read my post that I just submitted titled "Early Position Starting Hands".

[donking]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Not see pocket aces for two months.

Not flop a set for a month and a half.


[/ QUOTE ]

Really? That's either absurdly brutal or somewhat of an exaggeration.

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends upon the hours/hands played. While I was running bad and was bored onetime, I kept track of the number of pocket-pairs that did not flop a set. I was up to 17 before I hit a set. It is frustrating when at the same time the guy next to you gets AA/KK/QQ 3 or 4 times that win and you see someone else flop 3 sets in a row and win.

[donking]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But isn't it easier for a good player to have a bigger win rate and lower variance live?

[/ QUOTE ]

The bigger the win rate comes with a higher variance level. Which also comes with aggression. It took me awhile to actually grasp that.

Game texture also comes into play. You'll have lower variance in a tighter game than a looser one. The more people see the flop, the higher your winrate will be, but your swings will be bigger.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this is true and something that I'm just getting used to too. As you move up in limits, the bigger games have more aggression, thus they have more variance.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Not see pocket aces for two months.

Not flop a set for a month and a half.


[/ QUOTE ]

Really? That's either absurdly brutal or somewhat of an exaggeration.

[/ QUOTE ]

It depends upon the hours/hands played. While I was running bad and was bored onetime, I kept track of the number of pocket-pairs that did not flop a set. I was up to 17 before I hit a set. It is frustrating when at the same time the guy next to you gets AA/KK/QQ 3 or 4 times that win and you see someone else flop 3 sets in a row and win.

[/ QUOTE ]

There's like a 12% chance of that happening, hardly scarce.

The original two statements however are so absurd they are hardly believable.

[SA125]

Sklansky's "Poker, Gaming and Life" has an essay about "max losses". The example he uses is either a 6-12 or 8-16 game. Don't remember exactly. I liked it and think it's worth a read.