The Party 10/20 game

TimM · #1 01-27-2006, 05:22 PM

I know a lot of us here are multi-tabling this game, and we all seem to be on downswings. I just wonder how much we are stepping on each others toes it. There aren't that many tables running and I often see many other TAGs at the table.

But we don't clash very often, and there are plenty of really bad fish too. Most of my session results hinge on a few big pots vs. the fish, and whether I make my draws or get outdrawn in those pots. Still I have to wonder, maybe we are depriving each other of multiway action or something?

Is this just a normal downswing paranoia? In November I got it bad enough to download a packet sniffer to see if there was any unusual outbound network traffic on my system while I was playing, and I was disappointed not to find anything!

shant · #2 01-27-2006, 05:45 PM

There are times when every table is filled with TAGs. Some of the TAGs in these games I would hope are not 2+2 because they play really bad, but they get there.

Sometimes, like last night, every table is full of retarded fish just handing their money away, and even though sometimes I clash with a TAG or two, for the most part these fish are padding the pots nicely.

shant · #3 01-27-2006, 05:46 PM

I'd also be interested in finding out if some people I suspect as being 2+2 are 2+2ers, but I don't think people want to give away their aliases, and I think it's frowned upon on these boards to discuss players by name.

TStoneMBD · #4 01-27-2006, 06:01 PM

there are alot of downswings and breakeven stretches this month it seems, and while im sure most of it is just poor variance i think the games are getting tougher and alot of winning players are no longer winners.

Dan BRIGHT · #5 01-27-2006, 06:09 PM

I avoid the 2+2'ers simply because they vp tends to not be above 40, which is my standard opponent really

TimM · #6 01-27-2006, 06:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I'd also be interested in finding out if some people I suspect as being 2+2 are 2+2ers

[/ QUOTE ]

This is almost always the case, in my experience.

[ QUOTE ]
but I don't think people want to give away their aliases, and I think it's frowned upon on these boards to discuss players by name.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind if a few people here know my PP name, but I wouldn't want it posted.

shant · #7 01-27-2006, 06:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
there are alot of downswings and breakeven stretches this month it seems, and while im sure most of it is just poor variance i think the games are getting tougher and alot of winning players are no longer winners.

[/ QUOTE ]
Speaking of only the 10/20, I haven't noticed a differnce in the gameplay from the past couple months and this month.

TimM · #8 01-27-2006, 07:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
there are alot of downswings and breakeven stretches this month it seems, and while im sure most of it is just poor variance i think the games are getting tougher and alot of winning players are no longer winners.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I am stressed and playing a little worse than I should be, but I refuse to believe I am not winning tons of Sklansky bucks all through this recent breakeven stretch just based on what I am up against all the time.

Mainly I am stressed and annoyed because I:

- Had to tap into savings for living expenses three months in a row (first down month since playing full time was in November, won in December only enough to cover November loss, breakeven in January after a very good start).
- Lost my rakeback at the same time.
- Will have the rest of my current savings taken by taxes in April, so I feel like need to start winning again now so I can build up some more cusion by then.
- Was crushing 10/20 and 15/30, and holding my own (~0.6 BB/100) in 20/40, from August to mid November. Now as of yesterday, I am back to 5/10 for confidence. Yuck.

jason_t · #9 01-27-2006, 07:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
there are alot of downswings and breakeven stretches this month it seems, and while im sure most of it is just poor variance i think the games are getting tougher and alot of winning players are no longer winners.

[/ QUOTE ]

The gameplay has not changed.

Dazarath · #10 01-27-2006, 09:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
there are alot of downswings and breakeven stretches this month it seems, and while im sure most of it is just poor variance i think the games are getting tougher and alot of winning players are no longer winners.

[/ QUOTE ]

*raises hand*
Me! Me!

On another note, what's a "Sklansky buck" defined as? I see the term alluded to occasionally, but I've never seen a definition. I have an idea of what people are talking about, but I'd just like to make sure.

I'm thinking it's just theoretical EV, right? Like, if I played a game where we flipped a fair coin, and I got $2 for heads and -$1 for tails, if I lost $3 over 3 flips, I'd have $1.50 in Sklansky bucks, is this correct?