Trying to run good. Perhaps another rambling post.

[Bob T.]

That is what we are all doing, isn't it?

I noticed that the last several times that I had to clear bonuses (Bonusi?), I ran really good. Just recently, a friend of mine signed up to play at UB, and I got a $100 refer-a-friend bonus there, and had to play 1000 raked hands to recieve the bonus. I hate having my money tied up so that I can't withdraw it. So even though I was pretty busy with life, (which is a completely different long and uninteresting story) I went to work to get my hands in.

After about a 5 or 6 days, I had got the 1000 raked hands in at UB, but in the meantime, something else had happened. I had won about 10BBs/100 during that stretch. I actually didn't post a loss on any table during the period that I was clearing the bonus. That's nice for me, but what does it do for you?

Well here is what I was thinking. This is the part where you might have to connect the dots carefully. Why do I tend to run well when I have to clear bonuses? Well, I usually put in longer sessions, and instead of being happy with a little win, I usually play until I have played a certain amount of hands, instead of until I have a nice win for the day, or a ugly loss for the day. We'll come back to this in a minute.

So, what I did was figure out how much I wanted to win each month, and made an estimate for what my win rate truly is. Then I figured that I am probably at least only 2/3rds as good as I think I am. So I figured out how many hands I have to play, to win as much as I wanted to, and made a budget for how much I needed to play each day in order to make my goals. So far, I have been able to get in as many hands as the budget called for each day, and while I have been doing this, I have been running above my longterm averages. It hasn't been long, so sample size man would probably say 'Your sample size is deemed - Insufficient.'

But back to the point. You don't need to do this. You probably would benefit from doing something else, but the question is what is that something else? What I did, was see a pattern that seemed to make me play above average. (By measuring my sessions in hands, instead of dollars, I seem to make better decisions.) If you think over your game, and see times that you seemed to play better, maybe you could somehow change the game you are playing, to make it more like the one that you succeed at.

Hope this helped.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[sthief09]

Bob (AKA Coach)-

I agree with this assessment completely. Limit Hold'em is a psychologically demanding game. The swings can be absurd, and over a pretyt substantial amount of time, a winning player can lose a lot of money. Similarly, it's possible to play a hand perfectly and still lose, making it extremely hard to be objective about your own play. It's human nature to think, "how could I have lost less?" when your aces get cracked.

Setting goals, like $60k in 60 days, or move up in limits in 4 weeks, only add to this psychological stress. I actually started doing something a couple of days ago, and I find that it makes playing a lot less stressful. When I play live, I now stack my chips in tall or different sized stacks, so I have no idea how I'm doing. I'm constantly changing the sizes and shapes so that I can't eye out how much money I have in front of me. In the shortrun, specifically one night of live poker, it's impossible to make anything of your results. 8 hours of play yields as many hands as one hour of online 4-tabling. When I play online, I'm not concerned if I'm down after 30 minutes, but live, if I'm down after 4 hours I start to feel the pressure to get unstuck, even though I've played roughly the same amount of hands.

You can't control the cards you get, and there's really no way of telling just how good or bad your cards are. As every regular here stresses to the new posters, you need a lot of hands to discern anything about someone's ability to beat a game. Trying to win a certain amount over a short period of time is pointless, just like being results-oriented. While a player can have a specific hourly rate, it's impossible to expect that rate over 5 or 10 or probably even 15,000 hands.

This is how I explain it to my friends:
A typical winrate for a player at 5/10 could be something like 2 BB/100 hands. A typical standard deviation is around 16. let's say this player 3 or 4-tables, averaging 200 hands per hour.

That means that 68% of the time, the player will be -14BB to +18 BB in any given half hour. in other words, 2/3 of the time, this player will be somewhere between $140 in the red and $180 in the black in any given half hour.

[Bob T.]

When I play live, I now stack my chips in tall or different sized stacks, so I have no idea how I'm doing. I'm constantly changing the sizes and shapes so that I can't eye out how much money I have in front of me.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif I do that, too. Ever notice how much it bothers some people. 'Hey buddy, you know those are stackes of 20?'

'Yeah, I like stacking them in 19s, it's was my jersey number when I played sports /images/graemlins/grin.gif.'

or

'Prime numbers are luckier than round numbers.'

I also think the combination of them not being able to eyeball your stack, and your not caring how much you have, makes you more unpredictable, and dangerous.

in other words, 2/3 of the time, this player will be somewhere between $140 in the red and $180 in the black in any given half hour.

You could have added, and 1/3 of the time they won't.

Good luck,
play well,

Bob T.

[David BB]

[ QUOTE ]
bonuses (Bonusi?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Boni !

[Bob T.]

bonuses (Bonusi?)


Boni !

Thanks, I knew it was out there somewhere.

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
When I play live, I now stack my chips in tall or different sized stacks, so I have no idea how I'm doing. I'm constantly changing the sizes and shapes so that I can't eye out how much money I have in front of me.

[/ QUOTE ]

The apex of this must have been the Mike Caro, sloppy LAG pile of white chips when we switched up to rotation the other night. No one was fooled once you started meticulously splitting the pot after each street during O8.

[Rubeskies]

I've figured out how much money I make per hand I play based on my statistics. This helps me want to play more hands. It also helps me to ignore meaningless short term swings (up or down but mostly down).

[Louie Landale]

Setting win-goals makes sense for endevours that feature a high correlation between effort and results: "dig a 10' ditch today" is a good goal. But short term varience in poker is so huge that setting such goals, even for a month, is rediculously unrealistic.

If you are in the habit of leaving to lock up a "little win" then you a slap upside the head. You should keep playing when winning and tend to stop or change tables when losing. When losing, the money is gone NOW whether you cash out or not, even if it doesn't FEEL the same. When winning, you are statistically more likely to be in a more favorable situation (your strengths exaggerate their weaknesses); when losing its visa-versa. And when losing you tend to play worse and they tend to play better.

As to the rest of it: Your clear-the-bonus results are probably just reasonable statistical varience (luck). But if its not, perhaps this can explain it: when clearing the bonus you are "working" and have a more positive attitude: play well and don't sweat it. That suggests you have a lessor attitude when not working; perhaps you are "gambling" or trying to "win". Perhaps just playing a bunch of hands helps you towards your goal of "bonus", but when not doing that you have no goal, which then becomes "win".

No. Play well and let the winning take care of itself.

- Louie

Try this "goal": play 200 hands such that Malmuth couldn't critize your play.

[arkady]

I must say ever since I began thinking of poker in purely time intervals it makes it much easier. I am now starting to, its still impossible, but did it one day - to NOT look at the cashier before logging off. Its just simply not important...I got my hand histories and the rest do not matter. One long session, many little sessions...just keep repeating that.

[Bob T.]

Your clear-the-bonus results are probably just reasonable statistical varience (luck). But if its not, perhaps this can explain it: when clearing the bonus you are "working" and have a more positive attitude: play well and don't sweat it. That suggests you have a lessor attitude when not working; perhaps you are "gambling" or trying to "win". Perhaps just playing a bunch of hands helps you towards your goal of "bonus", but when not doing that you have no goal, which then becomes "win".


I think that this is it. Especially the part about trying to win. When I coach, I always try to teach my players that they need to focus on the process, and not the product. I need to take that advice myself.

[SomethingClever]

Good post.

My main goal for this month is to play 10,000 hands... half at .5/1 and half at 2/4.

If I make more money than last month, or less, so be it.

[Guy McSucker]

That was a really good post, except for this part:

[ QUOTE ]

You should keep playing when winning and tend to stop or change tables when losing


[/ QUOTE ]

No, you should keep playing when you have an edge and stop or change tables when you don't.

Guy.

[Latin Grammar Man]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
bonuses (Bonusi?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Boni !

[/ QUOTE ]

I deem your grasp of Latin grammar:

INSUFFICIENT

[Guy McSucker]

Remember UlyQuest (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=710182&page=&view=&sb=5&o =&fpart=1&vc=1).

(El Diablo used to be called Ulysses, in case you don't remember.)

Guy.

[Bob T.]

The Ulyquest was part of the inspiration for this post.