Losing streaks Comments and a question

[chill888]

Just finished wading through the losing streak post.

First I think the question is badly posed.

It should read "Has anyone (WHO IS A WINNING PLAYER) had a losing streak ....."

Lots of losing players have huge losing streaks. I have players in my database that haven't cashed in 25 S&Gs (9 handed at Stars) and by their play I believe the streak will continue.

Next I believe that if you are on a losing streak you should be careful before blaming it on statistical abberations (eg. 3 SD bad luck). It's far more likely you have leaks eg. pushing 99 early (just a joke from other thread). Tracking software is essential to verify you are a winning player. Tracking software helped me to move from the grind of cash games to the income stream of S&Gs/MTTs. Too many losing players claim or even believe they are winners. Remember, you must track EVERY game too - lol.

Next, I don't understand why people keep saying higher limits have more standard deviation. They only do in the sense that ITM% may be lower due to better players - if that's what they mean then agreed. ITM% dictates your SD. In fact the lower rake lowers your SD (as a % of buyin) at the higher levels (assuming same ITM%). I find I can get as high a ITM% at the $50s and $100s at Stars because of the better structure as at lower limit Party games that frustrate me (net I never play at Party).

Tracking software also helps hugely in game selection allows one to keep a high ITM% at higher levels. I regularly follow lousy players and avoid tables with too many good players - and can tell at a glance how tough a game will be. This is much harder at Party as games start too quickly. I believe this is worth an awful lot as there are lots of great players and lots of horrible players out there.

Finally my question: Are all these SD calculations based on a normal distribution? Because my results sure ain't normally distributed. Losing $$$ 's over a stretch of a 100 S&Gs would terrify me and make me reevalaute my game to such an extent that I might start pushing 99 early on (j/k).

GL and regards

[Irieguy]

Very nice post.

I think that when everybody says the variance is higher at the higher levels it is, as you suggested, because your ITM will be lower the higher you move up with the same skill level.

Very good point about SD and a normal distribution. I believe all of the SNG spreadsheets and tracking software out there assume a normal distribution when calculating SD. As you have found, the distribution for a winning SNG player is not a normal distribution. If you figured SD using a one-tailed distribution I think it would be closer to the truth, but I think the actual distribution for a winning SNG player is a unique animal that would require very sophisticated statistical work to truly calculate variance.

I think that's the main problem: nobody really knows what to expect, for certain, with regard to variance at the single table SNGs because it is still a relatively new phenomenon.

I'm pretty sure that simply plugging your ITM% and expectation into a statistical calculator to figure your SD based on a normal distribution is completely useless. My opinion, which is based pretty much on nothing but a lot of experience with statistics and data in other fields, is that variance in this setting is vastly underestimated.

Several players on this forum who have been winning for months or years over thousands of SNGs have posted results detailing a losing streak on the order of 100 trials or more. I've seen it myself, and know of a very skilled player who is experiencing it right now and has decided to cash out and quit for a while.

I'm way too statistically ignorant to be able to answer the questions about variance definitively, but the good news is that I don't really have to. Just as odds-calculator software obviates the need for actually doing the math to figure out hand equity, the internet obviates (to some extent) the need to figure variance precisely. You can play 1000 SNGs in a few months if you multi-screen... you'll have seen it all by then and have a pretty good grasp on your variance (assuming you don't start pushing 99 in response to a 100 SNG slump.)

Irieguy

[Gramps]

[ QUOTE ]
Next I believe that if you are on a losing streak you should be careful before blaming it on statistical abberations (eg. 3 SD bad luck). It's far more likely you have leaks eg. pushing 99 early (just a joke from other thread). Tracking software is essential to verify you are a winning player. Tracking software helped me to move from the grind of cash games to the income stream of S&Gs/MTTs. Too many losing players claim or even believe they are winners. Remember, you must track EVERY game too - lol.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the above is important - especially if you don't have a whole lot of trials at a level (e.g. 100), you can't assume that you results to before the losing streak are your LT results - review your game more...

...but if you have 500, 1,000, or more, while it's still statistically possible that you've just been running overly hot and are still carrying an inflated WR much > than your LT rate, it's equally important to not get all out of sorts, become gun shy, and start making unnecessary changes to your game that just compound your problems. If you play enough SNGs, streaks (both good and bad) are a reality. Just look back through your pokertracker tournament sumaries if you want confirmation of that.

[SlowStroke]

Great Post.

Two quick questions

1) What tracking software do you use?

2) I know I have played against you in a few $50s and $100s at Stars. What does your tracking software tell you about my play?

SlowStroke

[chill888]

Slowstroke

Pokertracker and pokerstat. slightly different stuff in each.

You cashed in 3 out 5 S&G's versus me. I cashed in 2 of those 5. Keep it up and I will have to start avoiding you /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Regards