Running well, and the inevitable reality check

phydaux · #1 10-14-2007, 03:08 PM

I've been playing uNL for over a year now. Even since January I've been crushing the game to the tune of ~8PTBB/100.

Since moving to 25NL, however, I've "hit a wall." Or so I was thinking. Last month I had my worst non-losing month where I only earned ~3PTBB/100. So far this month my results haven't been much better.

I was pulling my hair out. I was thinking "These players can't be that much better than 10NL. Maybe I suck as bad as a secretly think I do?"

Well, after some review of my sessions and rational reflection, I have come to accept that 8PTBB/100 was an unsustainable win rate, and 3PTBB/100 is much more in line with what a good player should expect to make in the long run.

Just so this isn't a total BBV, I wanted to post my story and just kind of remind other new players that no, in all probability you aren't God's gift to poker and that anyone can run hot for a short time, even months. Eventually the Bitch Goddess evens the playing field, and only those with an actual skill advantage end up in the plus column.

Take heed. Hubris and self-deception are the Original Sins of poker players. Guard yourself, lest you think too highly of yourself than you ought and the Bitch Goddess brings you to ruin.

diebitter · #2 10-14-2007, 03:17 PM

amen. Well said.

bottomset · #3 10-14-2007, 03:20 PM

the long run is so long, I don't think anyone has gotten there, or ever will

EN09 · #4 10-14-2007, 03:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the long run is so long, I don't think anyone has gotten there, or ever will

[/ QUOTE ]

the "long run" is equivalent to chasing the horizon or a sunset... it isn't 10k or 25k+ hands as some may think.

EN

BotOnTilt · #5 10-14-2007, 03:50 PM

I've been thinking about this a lot myself. Its very hard to know where I'm at. The thing is I don't thing there is a sample size large enough to tell how good a player is in the micros, from my own game I'd say that my game changes every 2k hands so I can't say that my previous hands would be any kind of indication for my skill since I play differently than I did last month. Its also so hard to be objective when running good/bad. At least I constantly try different things and look at my opponents game to try to figure out what works at the level I'm at.

Johnes Benjamin · #6 10-14-2007, 04:09 PM

Bot makes a good point. If you are really good your game should always be evolving, therefore making the "long run" all the more unattainable

CalledDownLight · #7 10-14-2007, 04:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
the long run is so long, I don't think anyone has gotten there, or ever will

[/ QUOTE ]

fgators has

WCGRider · #8 10-14-2007, 04:25 PM

Well said and is true, but the only real part i disagree with is putting in a time period on how long you can run bad for. I have no idea how many hands you play a day/week/month, but if someone plays about 5kish hands a day it would be very difficult for them to have a downswong for a month, or more then a week or two. Multiple month downswongs for a person like that would not be by chance.

But yeah the past has no effect on the future, so you can run good/bad for quite long.

bottomset · #9 10-14-2007, 04:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the long run is so long, I don't think anyone has gotten there, or ever will

[/ QUOTE ]

fgators has

[/ QUOTE ]

fgators is like -60buyins AI equity after 1.6million hands

CalledDownLight · #10 10-14-2007, 04:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Well said and is true, but the only real part i disagree with is putting in a time period on how long you can run bad for. I have no idea how many hands you play a day/week/month, but if someone plays about 5kish hands a day it would be very difficult for them to have a downswong for a month, or more then a week or two. Multiple month downswongs for a person like that would not be by chance.

But yeah the past has no effect on the future, so you can run good/bad for quite long.

[/ QUOTE ]

your post contradicts itself. You can run bad forever. End of story. The inverse is obviously also true.