Possibility of losing 100 BB's in one session?

[Posititve EV]

I know its not likely but is it possible to lose 100 Big bets in an 8 hour session if you are playing excellent poker? I believe it is even if you are playing correctly but I wanted to make sure.

I moved up to 20/40 for the 1st time and lost $4,000 in an 8 hour session. A few things to note. One guy was on such a rush that he raised almost everytime and won about 70 % of the hands, it was sick he always caught his pairs or hit his draws. From my count he walked away with at least $8,000 profit in probably about 10 hours.

I know I made some errors in playing but nothign major. I believe I took a lot of bad beats which I am fine with as long as I made the correct play based on my expection in the long run.

For example I had KK dealt to me 3 times and lost all three either to having to fold when an ace flopped causing heavy betting or someone hiting their draw on the river. I also was rivered about 5 times when my oppents hit their inside or opened flush/straight draws. Another time I flop top 2 pair and keep raising only to get beat when the guy next to me trips up his pocket 4's on the turn even though it was 3 bet preflop and also on the flop. Another time my trip 10's are outkicked.

Although it was my 1st time playing 20/40 I believe I played very good. Some at the table talked about the game playign like a 40/80 because of the rush player raising alomst every time. This might have helped me lose 100 BB.

I have played 100's of hours online, read about 15 books, and constantly think about the game, and replay hands to see where I could of gained or saved some bets.

Does it seemed like I played bad in this game or I just hit a streak where the underdogs prevailed.

Thanks

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
One guy was on such a rush that he raised almost everytime and won about 70 % of the hands, it was sick he always caught his pairs or hit his draws. From my count he walked away with at least $8,000 profit in probably about 10 hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a sh*tty player can win $8K in ten hours, don't you think that a good player can lose $4K in roughly the same time frame?

I don't know if you're a great player or not. But is it possible that you can play great poker, get into a great, wild, delicious 20/40, and lose this much money?

Absolutely.

[Noo Yawk]

There is a similar post in the pshycology forum, and I'll give the same type of response.

There is not a chance you took 8 hours worth of bad beats, lost 100 big bets and played optimally. Your decision not to leave before having such a big loss alone is cause to believe that somewhere along the line your edge was gone.

I don't know your play, so I can't judge exactly how each hand went down, but I guarentee that if some of the real experts on this forum were sweating you they'd catch a dozen leaks. Stick around this forum for a while and in a year or so look back at this post and you'll realize that I'm right.

[OrangeHeat]

[ QUOTE ]
I know its not likely but is it possible to lose 100 Big bets in an 8 hour session if you are playing excellent poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

You can do it in 4 hours multitabling an aggressive game online /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Orange

[Nate tha' Great]

A player with a true win rate of +1/BB hour but variance of 20/BB hr (entirely possible in a game this LAG) will lose $4000 or more in an 8-hour session around 2.8 percent of the time. That's not a huge percentage but s*it happens when you log a lot of hours. I've had parallel bad runs in LAGro online games and while I have some leaks, I'm a good player and a substantial long-term winner.

You are radically underestimating the degree of variance instrinic to the game, and especially a loose and aggressive game like this one.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a similar post in the pshycology forum, and I'll give the same type of response.

There is not a chance you took 8 hours worth of bad beats, lost 100 big bets and played optimally. Your decision not to leave before having such a big loss alone is cause to believe that somewhere along the line your edge was gone.

I don't know your play, so I can't judge exactly how each hand went down, but I guarentee that if some of the real experts on this forum were sweating you they'd catch a dozen leaks. Stick around this forum for a while and in a year or so look back at this post and you'll realize that I'm right.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Noo Yawk]

Hi Nate,

Read the original post. His first time playing 20-40, and lost 100 BB's after 8 hrs. of bad beats. Not a chance he was playing optimally. Anything else would be just giving excuses.

Not trying to undermine your stats Nate, but 100 BB's is alot of money to lose in even the wildest games for a great player. It's possible, but rare. For a newbie, there is no way he played optimally.

[Rushmore]

To be fair, he never said he played optimally. In fact, he goes out of his way to tell us that he "made some mistakes."

I believe he has underestimated the number and magnitude of the mistakes he made.

He does not indicate that he was playing shorthanded, so I assume we're talking fullish table.

At least shorthanded, it would be more understandable.

But still a product of suboptimal play and bad decisions.

[BAD BEAT POLICE]

PEOPLE HAVE 1 OF 2 REACTIONS TO YOUR BAD BEAT STORY:

1. THEY DON’T CARE.

2. THEY ARE HAPPY.

PLEASE POST YOUR BAD BEAT STORIES AT www.RIVEREDAGAIN.com (http://www.RIVEREDAGAIN.com) AND QUIT CLUTTERING UP MY FORUM.

-BAD BEAT POLICE /images/graemlins/cool.gif

P.S. YOU OWE ME $1.

[obi---one]

I never lost 100bb's in a session in my life be it 8 hours of 48hrs. you probably had some bad luck but need to tidy up your game as well

[mplspoker]

In a wild game like you are talking about unless you are comfortable with taking huge hits (like 4K in a night) you must play tighter. There is no way you could possibly lose that much playing great poker. I could be wrong but you are probably calling a lot of raises that you normally wouldn't call b/c you know he is playing wild. $2,000 understandable. $4,000 probably some serious bad preflop and flop calls in my opinion.

[mplspoker]

Yes, but over that period you are playing a lot more hands..... Totally different.

[OrangeHeat]

I was being facetious....

orange

[JasonP530]

Nate, how do you figure the percent of times you will lost a certain amount, based on your variance and win rate? Do you use pokerstat, or is there a formula you use?

[tpir90036]

Jason,

Do a google search or search the probablity forum for "standard deviation" and/or "confidence intervals."

cheers,
-tpir

[Analyst]

Sub-optimal play certainly makes a 100BB swing more likely, but as Nate points out, statistics demonstrate that even winning players may run into this on occasion.

At a B&M, a 20BB standard deviation seems very high, but using 12BB and a +1BB/hour win rate gives the following for an 8 hour session:

mean result: +8 BB
std deviation: 34BB

so -100BB is a 3.17SD event, or roughly one in a thousand. Far from likely, yes, but how many stories have you read hear about people getting sucked about by perfect runner-runners? Just about the same odds there.

[Senor Choppy]

1 in a 1000 assuming a win rate of 1 bb/hour and 12 bb SD. Lower his win rate to .5 bb (it is his first time playing that limit after all), and jack up his SD to maybe 15 bb or so since one guy is raising every hand, and it will be a much more common event.

[Analyst]

Much more likely, as you state. Using your numbers it now becomes a 1 in 140 event. The average win rate is actually of relatively little importance for short-term swings - at 1BB/hour, a 100BB downswing will happen once in 180 times; at 0BB/hour, it's once in 110 times, but these are players of vastly different skill levels.

For a -2BB/hour fish, this'll happen once in 44 times - almost once per year for the weekend warrior! I've seen one player at the local B&M (who may very well be even worse than -2BB/hour) go through four racks within the first hour on several occasions.

[mike l.]

"But still a product of suboptimal play and bad decisions."

that's always been a winning formula for me so i dont see why that should hurt him.

[Senor Choppy]

I'm surprised at how little win rate figures into it. Thanks for running the numbers again.

[Noo Yawk]

Hi Rushmore,

Fair enough. I was addressing a portion of his post where he twice stated he played "very Well" and "correctly".
I'm fairly positive that a first time 20-40 player that lost 100 BB's in his first 8 hr session is far from aware what correct play is. He'll get there if he wants, but not if he assumes that his 100 BB loss is excused as variance. If he sticks around this board for a year, he'll realize that.

[Vehn]

You are my new favorite poster.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
I never lost 100bb's in a session in my life be it 8 hours of 48hrs. you probably had some bad luck but need to tidy up your game as well

[/ QUOTE ]

Say I have a win rate of 2/BB hr and a standard deviation of 16 BB/hr. I will have a -100 BB downswing in an 8 hour session once in 200 times or so.

Say I aim to play 25 hours a week, and 3 tables at a time ... that works out to 3900 table hours or about 500 equivalent 8-hour blocks of play each year. I should *expect* to have a -100 BB run a couple times a year playing this many hands.

Poker players are of two categories when it comes to extremely bad runs:

1) Those who have experienced one;
2) Those who will.

[Noo Yawk]

Hi Nate,

Bad downswings are a fact of poker. The problem is you are only using probability to detrmine the cause. After a certain amount of loss there has to come a point where even a great player says I give up, and that point is way before 100 BB's. The simple fact is even above average players that have a solid game when winning, are extremely prone to a deteriorating game and poor judgement when losing.

If You are talking about multi tabling on line, I would tend to view each table as a seperate session. But for arguments sake lets just say you don't. There are so many choices on-line for game selection, why not just leave the table that isn't going well for you? Why not come back another time? Why not just concentrate on one game for the rest of the session? There are plenty of ways to avoid a loss that big. Most people simply aren't as good when they're losing. The only exception I see is in a home game with reasonable stakes for your bankroll where you're having fun.

Ask a poker player who's stuck 100 BB's why their still playing and they'll tell you because the games good and they have an edge. Ask a craps player the same question when they're losing a relative amount and you'll get the real answer: "I'm not leaving until I get my freakin' money back".

[MikeGuz]

Playing correctly?

Is that based on this table or any table.

The "LONG RUN" does anyone know how long that is?

To answer your question it is certainly possible to lose that sort of money in that time. Playing good or not.

A lot of newer players make the mistake of caling a lose agressive player a fish when in fact they play really well after the flop. Of course if the deck is hitting a guy not much you can do in the shore run - BTW how long is the long run anyway?

[Posititve EV]

Thanks for all the informative posts....

I would say the long run is 1,400 hours since that is the amount of time it takes to eliminate all luck and an expert player will at least break even guranteed.

I agree that I should of tightened up a lot more than I did. But I also should mention along with the player who couldn't lose their were 2 guys who just said they lost over 10K each in black jack. They seemed to just want to slow up their gambling loses and where playing tons of hands and flat calling showing down middle and bottom pairs. The game looked so juicy I just had to call some pre flop raises.

Also I'm not trying to complain about my bad beats. I wish they didn't happen but its a fact of poker, as long as I made the correct play based on a positive expectation I am fine. I did make mistakes and looking back I should have got up when I was down 50 BB's but I just kept it in my head that a game like this doesn't come up that often...at least 3 of the 10 people were playing worse than I'd ever seen.

So say I lost 70BB's in that 8 hour span does that make any difference...has some of you been through that. Preflop was basically raised almost every hand with raising continuing through the whole hand...does this turn the game into a 40/80 and thus cut my 100 bb's in half.

Thanks for all the help I have learned more from this board in the past week then I have playing over 200 hours in BM card rooms.

[Senor Choppy]

[ QUOTE ]
If You are talking about multi tabling on line, I would tend to view each table as a seperate session. But for arguments sake lets just say you don't. There are so many choices on-line for game selection, why not just leave the table that isn't going well for you? Why not come back another time? Why not just concentrate on one game for the rest of the session? There are plenty of ways to avoid a loss that big.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's like saying there are plenty of ways to avoid a roulette wheel hitting red 10 times in a row.

No matter who you are, 100 bb downswings will happen even if you play like a god, and no amount of changing tables, switching seats, or putting 24 hours in between sessions is going to change that.

[thwang99]

If you get arrested by that policewoman for posting a bad beat, I've got tons to post. /images/graemlins/smile.gif - Tony

[Noo Yawk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If You are talking about multi tabling on line, I would tend to view each table as a seperate session. But for arguments sake lets just say you don't. There are so many choices on-line for game selection, why not just leave the table that isn't going well for you? Why not come back another time? Why not just concentrate on one game for the rest of the session? There are plenty of ways to avoid a loss that big.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's like saying there are plenty of ways to avoid a roulette wheel hitting red 10 times in a row.

No matter who you are, 100 bb downswings will happen even if you play like a god, and no amount of changing tables, switching seats, or putting 24 hours in between sessions is going to change that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're taking my point out of context, and nowhere did I mention seat changes. Again, if you play ONE session for EIGHT HOURS and take BAD BEAT after BAD BEAT your FIRST TIME PLAYING A HIGHER LIMIT, then there is no way you are playing nearly as well as you believe.
You do have options, and leaving, dropping limits, finding a better game are all valid choices to make loooong before droping 8 racks in a 20-40 game. If your playing like a god and we know that for a fact, then the variance is of course likely. But to assume you're playing like a god after dropping 100BB's is a ridiculous assumption. These swings happen in ONE SESSION almost always for one reason: The player insists on overestimating themselves relative to the game and lose their freakin' minds.

[Turning Stone Pro]

played 8-5o for two cold the other night, like you all advised me to. Took a huge pot down!

Sorry that I doubted the Tommy worshippers! I'm back on board!

[MMMMMM]

Now you are learning.

[SA125]

I don't know about 100 in 8 hrs, but my last session at 10-20 I lost 35 BB's in 4-1/2 hrs. Cold? Nah. Deep freeze.

It was a sunny day and I would have bet that if I went outside and walked across the street, it would have been raining just on me.

The highlight was my 7777 getting straight flushed. He bet, I raised and he called. Didn't even know he had it. Unreal. Stuck $700 playing decent, not excellent, and my quads losing to daydreamers.

Went for $300 more, got hot and in the next 1-1/2 hr won all back but $100. Time was up and had to go. Not your average day at the tables.

So can you lose that much even when playing pretty well? I thought I was going.

BADBEATPOLICE - sorry about this post. If that cop has a problem with it, she can let me know. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Wayfare]

[ QUOTE ]
A player with a true win rate of +1/BB hour but variance of 20/BB hr (entirely possible in a game this LAG) will lose $4000 or more in an 8-hour session around 2.8 percent of the time. That's not a huge percentage but s*it happens when you log a lot of hours. I've had parallel bad runs in LAGro online games and while I have some leaks, I'm a good player and a substantial long-term winner.

You are radically underestimating the degree of variance instrinic to the game, and especially a loose and aggressive game like this one.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a similar post in the pshycology forum, and I'll give the same type of response.

There is not a chance you took 8 hours worth of bad beats, lost 100 big bets and played optimally. Your decision not to leave before having such a big loss alone is cause to believe that somewhere along the line your edge was gone.

I don't know your play, so I can't judge exactly how each hand went down, but I guarentee that if some of the real experts on this forum were sweating you they'd catch a dozen leaks. Stick around this forum for a while and in a year or so look back at this post and you'll realize that I'm right.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

According to the standard deviation rule shouldn't one's standard deviation be within 3 of the mean approximately 99.75% of the time? Intuitively this math seemed fishy and I checked it here:

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Standard_deviation

[mmcd]

Yes its definately possible even if you are playing well (esp. in a wild game) but more than likely you got stuck like 1500-2500 (can EASILY happen in a wild game) and you tilted off the rest. Not necesesarily full-blown jam-it-up tilt, but tilt just the same.

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A player with a true win rate of +1/BB hour but variance of 20/BB hr (entirely possible in a game this LAG) will lose $4000 or more in an 8-hour session around 2.8 percent of the time. That's not a huge percentage but s*it happens when you log a lot of hours. I've had parallel bad runs in LAGro online games and while I have some leaks, I'm a good player and a substantial long-term winner.

You are radically underestimating the degree of variance instrinic to the game, and especially a loose and aggressive game like this one.

[ QUOTE ]
There is a similar post in the pshycology forum, and I'll give the same type of response.

There is not a chance you took 8 hours worth of bad beats, lost 100 big bets and played optimally. Your decision not to leave before having such a big loss alone is cause to believe that somewhere along the line your edge was gone.

I don't know your play, so I can't judge exactly how each hand went down, but I guarentee that if some of the real experts on this forum were sweating you they'd catch a dozen leaks. Stick around this forum for a while and in a year or so look back at this post and you'll realize that I'm right.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

According to the standard deviation rule shouldn't one's standard deviation be within 3 of the mean approximately 99.75% of the time? Intuitively this math seemed fishy and I checked it here:

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Standard_deviation

[/ QUOTE ]

I know what freaking standard deviation is. The player with these stats will not lose $4000 in *one* hour almost ever. But this is an 8-hour session.

[ike]

The point is not whether or not its possible to lose 100BBs in 8 hours playing perfectly. It definetly is and some of the number people on the board have already looked at the probabilities in detail. The point is that its very unlikely that you would lose 100BBs in your first 8 hours of 20/40 if you were playing great and very likely that you were not in fact playing as well as you thought your first time in a higher limit game. I'd also be surprised if you didn't tilt at some point during the session. I'm usually pretty good about not tilting but I think I'd have a difficult time dropping 8 racks and continuing to play well. Just out of curiosity, what made you leave? Had you set an 8 hour time limit or did you have somewhere to be or did you just lose every dollar in your wallet? If its the last of those, I'm pretty sure you were on tilt.

[Senor Choppy]

It's true that player error is more likely the cause of big losses than normal variance, (at least in the situation described), but when you say "There are plenty of ways to avoid a loss that big.", that's not always the case. You have to prepare for 100 bb losses eventually, it's a fact of life.