how do i get out of this cold streak??

[skin city]

i have been running ridiculously bad lately. actually its been sence around mid-feb. i used to run over these small NL cash games. you know all these tourists coming to town to "try there hand at Texas Hold em" id just kill em
and with the small buy-in tourneys ($80-150 buy-in) as well!
it was pretty common for me to make the final table and usually cash.
now im not exactly sure what happened in febuary, but something did, and im now im lucky to make it to the first break! i havent walked from a cash game with chips in i-dont-know-how-long. WTF????
my confidence is at an all time low. when i get my money in good. it seems like i ALWAYS get sucked out on. and when i DO have the pure nuts, even though i know i cant lose, it seems like im expecting to somehow lose this one too.
ive tried taking some time off (2 weeks) and that didnt help. do i play my way out of this funk? (bankroll is taking a hit) do i take more time off? do i quit all together? what? or is this just one of those things that happens to poker players? during my 6 years playing never had a dry spell like this sence my first year, when i was a TOTAL DONKEY! am i a donkey again? any sugestions you guys have would be great! thanks again
skin city [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Dangeresque]

This is one of the reasons I prefer limit. There's less variance in the game, so those sickening cold streaks tend not to last as long, though, mind you, there's less profit. I recommend re-evaluating what level you can play at with your current bankroll, and possibly playing online, where more trials will reduce the size of the variance, relative to the Expected Value. If, after all this, you're still losing, you may have serious problems in your game, which is why you should be rereading your books and applying concepts to every hand you play.

[skin city]

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the reasons I prefer limit. There's less variance in the game, so those sickening cold streaks tend not to last as long, though, mind you, there's less profit. I recommend re-evaluating what level you can play at with your current bankroll, and possibly playing online, where more trials will reduce the size of the variance, relative to the Expected Value. If, after all this, you're still losing, you may have serious problems in your game, which is why you should be rereading your books and applying concepts to every hand you play.

[/ QUOTE ]

you make some great points. how ever i am definatly NOT a limit player, i'll try your other suggestions though, thank you sir

[deucethree]

I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[drzen]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he means bigger swings in dollar terms.

[drzen]

Take more time off. Have a while of no poker, no thinking about poker. Then read something helpful, Harrington would be perfect. Don't play, just read it through, and have a think about what he says.

Get some money into Stars or whatever and play way below your bankroll, so that the money is meaningless. I don't mean donk it up. I mean play your best, but at a level where you're not thinking about the cash. You should crush the micros and you'll start feeling good about yourself again.

Play some games you don't normally bother with. A bit of HORSE, a bit of Omaha. Whatever you don't play much of. Limit even. Play for FUN. You've lost the fun. You're anxious whenever you play. Get the love of it back. The cooler will end and you'll kill the game once more.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[/ QUOTE ]
Generally, it does. See this post.

[Dangeresque]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[/ QUOTE ]
Generally, it does. See this post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right you are. I'm just not very good at NL, and multi tabling, I don't think I could ever stand the moment things go "WHAM! WHAM! Two buy-ins." Mind you though, I'm trying to learn NL.

[emerson]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he means bigger swings in dollar terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think limit does have bigger swings in dollar terms. This is comparing games like 2/5 NL to 20/40 limit. BB size about 8x as big for the limit game, compared to an approximately equal NL game. Or perhaps 1/2 NL as compared to 8/16 limit. I think limit is more volatile.

[drzen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought limit hold 'em had more variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he means bigger swings in dollar terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think limit does have bigger swings in dollar terms. This is comparing games like 2/5 NL to 20/40 limit. BB size about 8x as big for the limit game, compared to an approximately equal NL game. Or perhaps 1/2 NL as compared to 8/16 limit. I think limit is more volatile.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are simply comparing oranges with pears, dude. 1/2 NL should be compared with 1/2 limit. I don't know what you mean by the blinds' being 8x the size. They aren't. The pots are, yes, but that's kinda the point we're making here.

If I play limit, I can win or lose 40BB a session. I could lose that in one pot at NL.