Have I just run lucky at $1 $2 cash games?

[greekgooner]

I seem to win more often at these higher buyins than I ever did at .25/.50 and .50/$1 cash games. I don't know if its because the money means more or that representing a hand is given more credit but I seem to play much better. Because the money is higher I play much tighter and am prepared to lay down more top pairs/two pair hands. At lower levels I was finding myself calling a raise just to see if I got lucky.

Do you think this is a good level or should I go back and grind the lower levels properly? Although I feel comfortable at this level I have only played around 1k hands

[johnnydrama]

No way to tell by the number of hands played. Review your hands and see if you had the best of it most of the time or truely "got lucky" in a few big pots.

[poker_bill]

[ QUOTE ]
... Because the money is higher I play much tighter and am prepared to lay down more top pairs/two pair hands. At lower levels I was finding myself calling a raise just to see if I got lucky ...

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect that this is where the answer lies.

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
No way to tell by the number of hands played. Review your hands and see if you had the best of it most of the time or truely "got lucky" in a few big pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even thats not very useful. A lot of the luck in poker isn't obvious in hand histories.

[raze]

Hey man if you're runnin good then keep runnin, as long as you have the bankroll.

[johnnydrama]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No way to tell by the number of hands played. Review your hands and see if you had the best of it most of the time or truely "got lucky" in a few big pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even thats not very useful. A lot of the luck in poker isn't obvious in hand histories.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meant hands that went to show down. What other "luck" factors are there than coming from behind to win a pot? Your reply will help me develop also since I thought reviewing HH is the best way to gauge your play?

Thanks!

[SellingtheDrama]

One of the biggest luck factors is just getting dealt the right spots. Getting high-value hands (AA/KK/etc) with greater than expected frequency will make you more money than 'expected'.

[johnnydrama]

How are we supposed to "evaluate" getting good hole cards?
I would think the true measure of a winning player is not how often they get AA but what they do with it in each particular hand, by itself.

I would think we all have to start from a common point, that being our hole cards. So are you saying I need 100k hands logged before I even know if I am playing correctly?

I can't control the cards I am dealt, only what I do with them. I have a hard time beleiving this is any measure of good play.

Thanks!

[SellingtheDrama]

I don't remember the frequencies for unpaired cards offhand, but I recall it being once every 221 hands to be dealt a given pair. So if you play 1000 hands and get aces 10x, you are running good and likely will win more than average/expected. That's about all I was trying to say. The other measure as an example would be set mining with more success than mathematically expected.

I don't believe any player will ever know his/her true winrates, because there are simply too many variables, including the experience one (which hopefully means you are constantly improving).

The original question dealt with 'running lucky' and I was trying to suggest a quantifiable measure to assess that luck.

[johnnydrama]

Then could you take it to another level and see how much you win with each PP dealt and compare it to expected wins? That way you know if you are making too much with 66, or JJ? Trying to quantify this is enough to make your head spin! I think I got what you are saying. I hope getting hit with the deck during a session would be obvious enough so one doesn't think he is crushing the game when he gets AA and KK four times in a hour.