They say it builds character...

[David BB]

But I don't need character, I just need money /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Game level: $2/$4
Total hands: 17,943
VP$IP: 14.94
Won$WSF: 32.47
Amount won: -1,520.41$
BB/100 hands: -2.12
Went to SD: 35.63
Won $ at SD: 46.70
PF raise: 9.08

Yes, thats a downswing of almost 400BB at 2/4. Having just booked two solid winning sessions it looks like this amazing streak has finally come to an end.

If someone out there is going through a rough streak maybe they can look to this and think: "At least its not THAT bad!" /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Has anyone ever experienced anything like this?

[Evan]

A 400 BB downswing is extremely unlkikely for a winning player. I think you should try a smaller game.

I'm not going to comment on your PT stats because this really isn't the forum for it, in fact this really isn't the forum for the whole question.

Post PT stats in books/software if you want to discuss them.

As for the downswing, well telling us all that you're sad really doesn't give us any way to make you happy.

[The T.A.]

That is really terrible, David.

Are you improving because you identified leaks in your game? Or, did you just have a really, really, really (emphasis on REALLY - you must be sleeping with the devil, here) bad string of luck?

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Sorry to say this, but I think a 17K hand -400BB downswing is highly unlikely for a winning player. Move down and work on your game. If you were previously a winning player over many tens of thousands of hand, then you are now doing something different. Stop it.

Look for holes, this is almost certainly not due to variance.

[David BB]

Evan,

I'm just going to ignore your rude comments and say that I'm posting this here for two reasons. This streak happened at Party 2/4 where the majority of the posters here play, as such I think its relevant. Also this is the forum where I posted the most and a few people here know of me.

[Evan]

Dude, I wasn't trying to be rude. If you think the fact that it was Party 2/4 is important, I dunno, okay I guess? I don't, but that's really my problem I suppose.

As for your second point, this is the forum where I post too, I just had a 200 BB downswing and probably only 5 people in this forum know about it (and that's from private conversations off of these boards).

I just don't see anything constructive in what you posted, mainly since you appear to have no plan of action or desire to find one. It looks pretty much like a bad beat post to me, except its a lot of them rolled together. What construcive and useful responses did you invision this post getting?

Seriously, once again, this is not meant to be rude in the slightest, its just that I don't understand why you think this is an appropriae place for this.

EDIT: Also, I find it pretty funny that you post 18k severely losing hands but qualify the stats by describing your alst 2 sessions of solid wins, therein indicating that the downswing is over. I ope it is too, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, don't you think? I mean, did you never have 2 winning sessions in a row at any point in those 18k hands?

[David BB]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to say this, but I think a 17K hand -400BB downswing is highly unlikely for a winning player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sure hope so! But I have certainly learned that anything is possible.

I haven't posted here a lot so most of you don't know me. But trust me when I say that I know what I'm doing and I'm constantly studying and evaluating my game. I've been making a living playing poker for more than half a year now and prior to this streak I had been winning 3.5BB/100 over 40k hands at 2/4.

My most winning hand during this streak is KK at 1.55BB/hand. AA is second at 1.49BB/hand which is almost half normal.

QQ is my 4th most losing hand at -0.37BB/hand. Other notable hands in the red are TT, 88, 77, AJs and JTs.

Also two pair hands are in the red (-282$).

[sthief09]

yeah I was gonna write that

[David BB]

[ QUOTE ]
I just don't see anything constructive in what you posted, mainly since you appear to have no plan of action or desire to find one. It looks pretty much like a bad beat post to me, except its a lot of them rolled together. What construcive and useful responses did you invision this post getting?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really looking for constructive responses. Just wanted to show how bad variance can be even to a solid winning player. Perhaps this is a bad beat post.. but its hell of a beat /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I find it pretty funny that you post 18k severely losing hands but qualify the stats by describing your alst 2 sessions of solid wins, therein indicating that the downswing is over. I ope it is too, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, don't you think? I mean, did you never have 2 winning sessions in a row at any point in those 18k hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I can hardly remember what winning is like! And no, I haven't had two significant winning sessions in a row since before this streak started.

I guess I just felt relieved that I finally had something that looked like an upswing and wanted to share it with the world /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[private joker]

http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html

[lehighguy]

I was a consistent winner at 3/6 as well. Close to 5BB/Hr 4 tabling. I did this for nearly 15,000 hands. The for a long time it stalled an finnally I started losing. In the last 5,000 hands I've lost $600 of my original $2,500. I wonder if I'm doing something new thats wrong or just some bad beats. My stats suggest a few bad beats in terms of I'm losing with premium hands. SHould I be really worried about this.

[David BB]

Oh, now you're just trying to hurt my feelings /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[private joker]

[ QUOTE ]
Oh, now you're just trying to hurt my feelings /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I'm really not. It's for everyone on the board, including me. I think this psychology is fascinating (in fact, I think I got that link from another forum here on 2+2), and we all need to think about the gap between our actual skill and the illusion of skill we hold. A lot of poker players think they're better than they are (myself included, I'm sure), and it takes some deep perspective to really grasp this concept.

[BusterStacks]

After 400bb, I think you can safely assume you cannot beat that level with your current play.

[wuarhg]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting indeed!

David, Maybe start posting some hands of how you play your standard hands? You never know.

[helpmeout]

Dont listen to Evan this is the place to post your small stakes stats, if people dont like stats posts then dont read them.

You are playing way too tight. The games at $2/$4 dont require such tight preflop standards.

I'm taking a guess here but it looks like you are going too far with your overcards.

You finally get a hand and you dont want to dump it when you miss, then you take it to the river and are reverse dominated when you hit TP or lose to a bigger hand.

When you make a good hand you dont get any action cos people have seen you folding hand after hand and when the flop is Ace high they know you have something.

I'd suggest you improve your table selection and loosen up preflop. If you cant limp in UTG with low PPs find a better table, if you cant limp in with multiway hands like A5s Q9s in middle to late then find a better table.

A 400BB downswing is real bad, you obviously have some big leaks in your game so cut back on your tables and concentrate on what you are doing.

[Lawrence Ng]

Hi David,

Are you just sitting in any old 2/4 game? Even at the 2/4 level I think it's important that you try and find a good game to play at.

From your stats alone, it looks like you are playing a tad bit too tight. Try to get the VPIP up to 17-19 percent if you can. That'll mean limping in with a few more marginal hands in mid/late position. If you find you can't do that on your table, then get off the table and pick a better one.

Your going to showdown to much. This means you are overplaying overcards, perhaps calling with pocket pair a bit too often on boards with overcards. Tighten up here a little. A general rule I like to use is that if there are more than 2+ other players seeing the flop and you miss (either overpair or pocket pair) you have to re-assess and determine whether or not you drawing or ahead. Most of the time you're not.

You are tight pre-flop, but post-flop you are too loose and of course if you are picking the wrong games (ie tight tables), then this is a serious problem.

Remember, game selection is key.

Good luck

Lawrence

[David BB]

Its interesting that you're all assuming I'm a losing player. This tells me something about the severity of this streak.

Even after this streak I still have an overall win rate of 2BB/100 for the 38k 2/4 hands I have in pokertracker so I am assuming that I'm a winning player.

The thing is that there no leak that will magically appear and take me from winning 3BB/100 to losing 2BB/100. I cut down my number of tables from 8 to 4 during this streak to get a better feel for what was happening. It seemed that no matter what I did I would end every session down 100-200$. Reviewing these sessions I realized that I wasn't playing different than before and I wasn't making mistakes that would cost me this much money. Even losing players have winning sessions some times! I didn't have one significant winning session during this time.

If you believe I'm a winner or not isn't important but lets for the sake of argument assume that I am. Evan said himself that he was on a 200BB downswing - well, if it can happen once it can happen twice. People may go through a lifetime of poker and never experience a streak like this, but given enough time it will happen. And if it can happen to me it can happen to you.

How are you going to deal with it when it happens? Are you going to assume that you game has deteriorated? That you are no longer a winning player? How are you going to go about plugging leaks that just aren't there?

I found this old thread about half way through this streak. I think it helped me some:

http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=psych&Number=204604&fpart= 1&PHPSESSID=

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to comment on your PT stats because this really isn't the forum for it, in fact this really isn't the forum for the whole question.

As for the downswing, well telling us all that you're sad really doesn't give us any way to make you happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see so he shouldnt be posting his downswing in this forum yet this is ok

[ QUOTE ]
i'm down a lot of bb's over a lot of hands over a long time.

someone hug me and tell me i'll be all right.



[/ QUOTE ]

of course you dont criticise Cris for posting this ,you join in and say something about his avatar.

[wuarhg]

DavidBB,

If you're confident you are playing good and analysing your hands and seeing nothing wrong then keep grinding and it will surely turn around, and it should be about time, 400bb would make me want to quit (nah /images/graemlins/grin.gif).

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
of course you dont criticise Cris for posting this ,you join in and say something about his avatar.

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense, E, but I tend to agree that this is a tad hypocritical.

[gaming_mouse]

Even after this streak I still have an overall win rate of 2BB/100 for the 38k 2/4 hands I have in pokertracker so I am assuming that I'm a winning player.

If I were you I would strongly consider re-evaluating that assumption. Yes, of course it is possible that this was a losing streak, but you can always use that possibility as a way of avoiding unpleasant evidence -- and this is very strong that you are now a losing player.

If you were a winning player before, I think something has changed.

You might want to put analyze your data, get an average and standard error, and do a p-test to determine if your data is even consistent with the assumption that your are a break even player. Too lazy to do the math right now, but I highly suspect p < .05 and you have evidence to reject that hypothesis. This should give you pause. If you still want to assume you are winning player, that's of course your choice, but I think at this point it's a dangerous one.

Not trying to be mean or anything -- but I think some re-evaluation would be a positive thing.

gm

[David BB]

helpmeout & Lawrence Ng:

Thanks for the replies.

Its interesting that you both mention overcards. Its true that I tend to play overcards (namely AK & AQ) aggressively if it seems likely that ace high is still the best hand depending on the size of the pot and the number of players still in. A hand like this seems very typical of my streak:

Party Poker 2/4 Hold'em (8 handed)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, A/images/graemlins/heart.gif.
UTG folds, <font color="CC3333">Hero raises</font>, MP1 folds, MP2 folds, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB calls.

Flop: (4.50 SB) 7/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 2/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 7/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls.

Turn: (3.25 BB) 5/images/graemlins/heart.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, <font color="CC3333">Hero bets</font>, BB calls.

River: (5.25 BB) 3/images/graemlins/club.gif <font color="blue">(2 players)</font>
BB checks, Hero checks.

Final Pot: 5.25 BB

Results in white below: <font color="white">
BB has 3d Qs (two pair, sevens and threes).
Hero has Qd Ah (one pair, sevens).
Outcome: BB wins 5.25 BB. </font>

I'll give it some thought.

As for game selection I tend to look for tables with an average pot of 30-36$ without too many regulars. But since I multitable its rare for me to get up and find a different table if the game gets worse. This is of course one of the reasons its impossible to maintain the same win rate going from 4 to 8 tables.

You both mention me playing too tight which is probably also caused by multitabling. After having imported about 20k hands into pokertracker I didn't seem to be making much profit on the small pairs (22-55), the non-broadway suited connectors and the small suited aces. So I tightened up on these a lot. I'll see about playing those more often.

[gaming_mouse]

Dave,

Interesting hand post. I find these hard to play too, and usually take the same line that you did -- but am not too happy with it, either.

gm

[JimRivett]

Hello David,

A couple of things, is this your first attempt at poker? If so then perhaps moving down in limits would help. Either way I think that you need to take a step back and take at a look at your game, and posting some hands may help.

With reguard to your posted stats, I'm a little new to poker tracker, however here's my take, you appear to ok pre flop (some may say to loosen up, but my VP$IP percent is below yours), your problem may be post flop, perhaps going too far with your hands and overplaying some hands, here's where the posting of hands comes in.

Oh and don't worry about being critized for posting stats. You see for me the most important stat of all is how much you win and I have a theory that some of these "fine fellows" who post here don't win as much as they would like you to think they do.

Jim

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
VP$IP: 14.94

[/ QUOTE ]
This seems a tad low to me. Maybe you aren't limping with suited cards often enough?

[ QUOTE ]
Won $ at SD: 46.70

[/ QUOTE ]
This could indicate that you are failing to recognize a losing hand. Just because you are dealt AA or KK, doesn't mean you have to show it down. Good folds might be a leak??

[smoore]

I'm in the middle of a slide right now myself. I have no long term evidence that I'm a winning player in a limit ring game. I am a +ROI player over two years in pokerstars MTT and SnG tournaments (no PT data, unfortunately),. Eveyone says the money is in the ring game, so I'm learning it. Lost money for the first 5k hands, won like crazy for 10k hands and now it's going back down. Some days party is like printing f'in money, some days the carrots eat the rabbits.

My point: How do your PT stats during this slide compare to your stats for your "career" at party? This may provide some insight into what is happening. I'm of the opinion that this isn't just variance.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not going to comment on your PT stats because this really isn't the forum for it, in fact this really isn't the forum for the whole question.

As for the downswing, well telling us all that you're sad really doesn't give us any way to make you happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see so he shouldnt be posting his downswing in this forum yet this is ok

[/ QUOTE ]
Ummmm, I guess. I don't see how they're related. This is pretty much a self-policed forum, so my comments are completelt appropriate. This is not a forum for statistics of "I'm sad" posts, its for strategy discussion. There are plenty of other forums on this site that this would be fine in. If you're ever in doubt, there's always OOT.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm down a lot of bb's over a lot of hands over a long time.

someone hug me and tell me i'll be all right.



[/ QUOTE ]

of course you dont criticise Cris for posting this ,you join in and say something about his avatar.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well first of all, the SS clique has been pretty well documented over time. /images/graemlins/grin.gif Second, Chris' post was obviously a joke while this one wasn't. Tirdly, contributing the great stuff that CDC has over time earned you the right to make stupid posts once in a while. Finally, the "No content" disclaimer on CDC's post is something this one could've used.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
this is the place to post your small stakes stats

[/ QUOTE ]
No,its not. There are other forums for that, seet the sticky at the top of the page for more discussion of it. This is a strategy forum.

[ QUOTE ]
if people dont like stats posts then dont read them

[/ QUOTE ]
This is kinda stupid. If I made a post saying that I hated black people but qualified it in the body of the post by saying, "If you don't hate black people don't read this," would that be okay with you? There are places for different types of posts, this is not the plce for this one (I hope there's no place for the one I described).

[ QUOTE ]
I'm taking a guess here but it looks like you are going too far with your overcards.

You finally get a hand and you dont want to dump it when you miss, then you take it to the river and are reverse dominated when you hit TP or lose to a bigger hand.

When you make a good hand you dont get any action cos people have seen you folding hand after hand and when the flop is Ace high they know you have something.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is why the post was useless, because all you can do is guess about it. There is no meaningful discussion that can come of it. The original poster said soemthing about wanting to show the bad side of variance, do you people having downswings think that all the regular posters here have never had one? or two? or ten?

[ QUOTE ]
A 400BB downswing is real bad

[/ QUOTE ]
Yea, pretty much the only thing you can say for sure after this whole thread, and you'd have to think he knew that to start with or he wouldn't have posted this.

[Elektrik]

To clarify that study that private joker posted:

The study looked at the bottom quartile (the worst 25% of the population). They grossly overestimated themselves (12% thought they were 62%).

I've studied this and other studies like it; it seems that every quartile places themselves somewhere within that third quartile. As in, even the top 25% in a field usually place themselves in the 50-75% range in terms of skills. They mention this farther down in the study.

What this study does NOT say is that everyone overestimates themselves; it just means that if you're in the bottom 50% relative to everyone else, you probably put yourself in the 50-75% range.

You can argue this studies application to poker and its potential irrelevance, as we have quantitative measurements of our abilities given a large enough sample size - the study assumes that you cannot measure yourself in such a way.

[helpmeout]

This is a small stakes forum, pokertracker stats are a big part of the learning curve.

We dont need bison groupies whining about stats, we surely put up with enough spam from your type.

Back to the original poster

Why are you playing 8tables? You are winning at 2bb/100 not 5.

Am I missing something about the benefits of playing zombie style poker at low limits?

If you arent beating the game for 5BB/100 then dont bother playing more than 2 tables. Actually dont bother playing anymore than 2 until you are at the end of the road. I figure this is $15/$30 for most people.

Until then you have to learn to play better, this means thinking about the game not clicking the mouse 200 times per minute.

[Keats13]

[ QUOTE ]
seet the sticky at the top of the page

[/ QUOTE ]

From said sticky:
[ QUOTE ]
we also cover more general questions about... evaluating your own leaks and so on and so forth.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
If I am posting about PokerTracker, why not post it in Books and Software or on the official PokerTracker forums ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Now, maybe David didn't provide quite enough info to determine his leaks, but he is clearly evaluating his small stakes hold 'em play. This is not a question "about PokerTracker" (such as, "where do I find my variance?" or "how do you export player notes?"), but a question about his play which includes some data extraced from PT for background.

Also,

[ QUOTE ]
If I have a question about sample sizes and my win rates, shouldn't it go in the Probability or Poker Theory

[/ QUOTE ]

This comes closest to the post, but if David is willing to seriously evaluate his game and look for leaks, I think this is a much better place for that than in Probability or Theory.

[Keats13]

Also, David, to reiterate what has been said, a 400 BB downswing is not variance. You are doing something wrong. If you are willing to acknowledge that and go on from here trying to find and fix those leaks, great.

If you refuse to accept that and are just whining about your win (loss) rate, than I will switch to Evan's side of the argument and say it's a waste of forum space.

[joker122]

why wouldn't he post 2/4 stats here, the place where most of the posters play 2/4 or 3/6? if that was in bison's rule book sorry because i haven't read it yet.

[uw_madtown]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you playing 8tables? You are winning at 2bb/100 not 5.

Am I missing something about the benefits of playing zombie style poker at low limits?

If you arent beating the game for 5BB/100 then dont bother playing more than 2 tables. Actually dont bother playing anymore than 2 until you are at the end of the road. I figure this is $15/$30 for most people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be a jerk, but this is dumb advice. Not because it's necessarily incorrect, but it's simplistic.

First, I highly doubt there's anyone here that can beat Party 3/6 for 5BB/100 in the long term. If there are, they're few and far between.

Secondly, people are different. Some can handle 4 tables with little to no dropoff in winrate. Others experience massive dropoff, and shouldn't try more than one or two unless they've got a very, very good winrate normally. The ability to multitable has more to do with your ability to multitask than it does with your ability to play poker. Discouraging people en masse from playing more than 1 or 2 tables is just bad advice.

It depends on their goals. If they're more concerned with improving their game than with their hourly rate, then one or two tabling is a good way to go, as you can focus on your game. If they're more interested in profits and can multitable at a decent win-rate, it will often be more profitable for them to do so. Someone who wins 3 BB/100 playing one table and 2 BB/100 playing four will make 3 BB/hr more by playing four tables at the lower winrate. I suspect that this is a typical scenario for many multitablers around here.

I do think that people should be careful playing more than 4 tables, as it seems that's when the sharper dropoffs can occur. I'd suggest a lot of hands at four tables or less first, a strong winrate at four-tables, and a honest, strong confidence in your ability to handle more tables.

In any case, multitabling should be handled cautiously -- add one table at a time to build up to 3, 4, or more, rather than diving in head first. And also keep in mind what your goals are and what kind of player you are. Any decision that doesn't take into account the EV of playing more tables AND what your personal goals are (money vs. improvement) is a poor decision.

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
This is not a forum for statistics of "I'm sad" posts, its for strategy discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes exactly!! Cant you see that you are contradicting yourself?

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
No,its not. There are other forums for that, seet the sticky at the top of the page for more discussion of it. This is a strategy forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

how is "please hug me" from Chris's post a strategy discussion but this guy asking how to improve his game not?
You seem to be acting like some self appointed moderator of this forum,albeit one without a consistent standard

[BusterStacks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No,its not. There are other forums for that, seet the sticky at the top of the page for more discussion of it. This is a strategy forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

how is "please hug me" from Chris's post a strategy discussion but this guy asking how to improve his game not?
You seem to be acting like some self appointed moderator of this forum,albeit one without a consistent standard

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't argue with a Poo-Bah.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a small stakes forum

[/ QUOTE ]
I gotta be honest, I like the way you're starting.

[ QUOTE ]
pokertracker stats are a big part of the learning curve

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess. This is when you stopped talking about this so I suppose I'm left to do some inference. There are other things that are a part of the learning curve too(I'm really only that word because you did, although I'm not entirely sure what you mean by it). I think that understanding why bad players that play for the thrill of gambling do the things they do is important too, but that discussion is better suited for the psychology forum. I also think that playing at the sites with the best games and the best software is important, but I'd post a question about that in the Internet forum. I could go on but I think you get it.

[ QUOTE ]
We dont need bison groupies

[/ QUOTE ]
Oh my god, did I mention that I got a pair of bison's underwear!!! I'm gonna save these forever and ever and ever!!!!

[ QUOTE ]
...whining about stats

[/ QUOTE ]
Disregard the above comment I guess.

[ QUOTE ]
we surely put up with enough spam from your type

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't knwo what I have to do with spam. Isn't spam inherently related to making money in some way? I don't even have anything to spam with. Maybe I should get something. If anyone wants to buy something, PM me I guess, and maybe I'll sell it too you.

[ QUOTE ]
Back to the original poster

[/ QUOTE ]
No no, do me again!!!

[ QUOTE ]
Why are you playing 8tables? You are winning at 2bb/100 not 5.

[/ QUOTE ]
Non sequiturs are fun.

[ QUOTE ]
Am I missing something about the benefits of playing zombie style poker at low limits?

[/ QUOTE ]
I play 6 tables and I find it pretty doable. I also talk on AIM and read 2+2 while I'm playing and I don't think I play zombie-esque poker. And not, I'm not winning 5 bb/100, partly because that's impossible and partly for other reasons I suppose.

[ QUOTE ]
If you arent beating the game for 5BB/100 then dont bother playing more than 2 tables

[/ QUOTE ]
This is absurd.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually dont bother playing anymore than 2 until you are at the end of the road. I figure this is $15/$30 for most people.


[/ QUOTE ]
This is more absurd.

[Chris Daddy Cool]

[ QUOTE ]
If you arent beating the game for 5BB/100 then dont bother playing more than 2 tables. Actually dont bother playing anymore than 2 until you are at the end of the road. I figure this is $15/$30 for most people.


[/ QUOTE ]


ahahahahahahahhahahahahaahhahahahahahhhhhahahahah.

[BusterStacks]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a small stakes forum, pokertracker stats are a big part of the learning curve.

We dont need bison groupies whining about stats, we surely put up with enough spam from your type.

Back to the original poster

Why are you playing 8tables? You are winning at 2bb/100 not 5.

Am I missing something about the benefits of playing zombie style poker at low limits?

If you arent beating the game for 5BB/100 then dont bother playing more than 2 tables. Actually dont bother playing anymore than 2 until you are at the end of the road. I figure this is $15/$30 for most people.

Until then you have to learn to play better, this means thinking about the game not clicking the mouse 200 times per minute.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, this is a horrible post.

[Noodles]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't argue with a Poo-Bah.


[/ QUOTE ]
I will argue with any Poo-bah that talks a load of old Poo /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Evan]

Keats, good post.

I think I'm starting to see where the difference in opinion is. You sy that since he's evaluating his game this post is appropriate. I don;t think that posting 8 or 10 or whatever stats from PT does that. I don't think that's the proper way to go about improving your game and finding your leaks. To be honest, I know its not.

These stats don't tell me anything about how well he understands fundmental concepts that are crucial to playing poker. I'm not sure if you think they tell you that, but they don't.

This is why I don'y like PT posts, because they don't breed meaningful discussions (see this one) about poker. What they do create is a long list of what results people think are good. That's really all it is, results. Telling someone that their vpip is too low is not all that helpful since they could start limping 87s UTG and "improve" their vpip because it would be closer to a "good" number.

On the other hand, posting indivdual hands that apply difficult (or even simple) concepts is extremely beneficial for everyone that reads it.

[Evan]

It is in the bison's sticky, but the point is just that its pretty useless. I explained why I think that in my last post.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes exactly!! Cant you see that you are contradicting yourself?

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that the posts I've made are "I'm sad" style posts? If you are I don't get it. I'm making an effort to keep this forum focused on what its meant for. Since 2+2 is largely self-policied I don't understand why you don't understand that.

If you meant something else, then no, I don't see that I'm contradicting myself.

[Evan]

CDC's post said "No Content" or something like that in the title. He was not interested in creating a discussion on whether or not he deserved to be hugged, when someone might hug him, or where said hugging might take place.

It was a joke, this was not (not intentionally anyway).

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't argue with a Poo-Bah.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you guys tell me how stupid I am a few mroe times I'm gonna be a carpal really soon.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
A 400 BB downswing is extremely unlkikely for a winning player. I think you should try a smaller game.

I'm not going to comment on your PT stats because this really isn't the forum for it, in fact this really isn't the forum for the whole question.

Post PT stats in books/software if you want to discuss them.

As for the downswing, well telling us all that you're sad really doesn't give us any way to make you happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's interesting how different the responses to this thread are than the responses to CDC's thread that is pretty much exactly the same. Jim Rivett is pretty vindicated by this thread IMO.
-James

[bisonbison]

David, X things:

1. Like the others said, in a game of the quality of 2/4, the odds that a winning player will experience a 400BB downswing are small. It is quite possible that you are not a winning player.

b. The clearest red flag in the stats you've provided is Won $ at SD, which is low, which indicates that you may be calling down too much. This is really the only red flag.

III. None of your other stats scream "bad play". You seem tight and aggressive preflop, but we can only see the silhouette of your actions. It's quite possible that you are playing the wrong hands the wrong way preflop or that your postflop skills are not good or actively bad.

D. It is quite possible that you are a winning player despite the flaws you (like all of us) have, but if you are really 8-tabling 2/4 and losing at this rate over this many hands, it is quite possible that you cannot competently 8-table.

This is not a flaw in your game. I 6-table 3/6 and I can't 8-table 2/4. It is too much for me.

5. The most relevant thing for this thread and for you: you've been a member for over a year and you have 183 posts. No one who hasn't met you in person knows your game but you. If you want feedback, you're going to have to post and respond to other's hands.

In the meantime, I suggest you move down in levels and cut down on tables.


As for all the other stuff going on in this thread:

If you want to know how likely it is that you are actually a winner despite these results, post in Prob. If you want help to get out of this, post some hands in SS. If you want sympathy, post (off-topic) or post in Psych.

[bisonbison]

It's interesting how different the responses to this thread are than the responses to CDC's thread that is pretty much exactly the same. Jim Rivett is pretty vindicated by this thread IMO.
-James

I'm pretty sure that Chris understands that his results may show that he's not a winning player at 15/30.

If David here doesn't understand that these results may show he's not actually a winner at 2/4, then he's in for some potential pain.

[bisonbison]

Dont listen to Evan this is the place to post your small stakes stats, if people dont like stats posts then dont read them.

It's easier to do that when the post is clearly labeled.



Besides, the great thing about stat posts like this is that even though the stats are basically opaque, there's no reason you can't respond with detailed advice:

You are playing way too tight. The games at $2/$4 dont require such tight preflop standards. I'm taking a guess here but it looks like you are going too far with your overcards. You finally get a hand and you dont want to dump it when you miss, then you take it to the river and are reverse dominated when you hit TP or lose to a bigger hand. When you make a good hand you dont get any action cos people have seen you folding hand after hand and when the flop is Ace high they know you have something.

Joe BaseballPlayer asks helpmeout for advice. I'm batting .245 this season, what's up?

I've never seen you swing a bat, but I'm gonna take a guess here and say that you're too concerned with pulling fastballs from left-handed pitchers. You end up so intent on getting out in front of the heater that you're not even touching the breaking pitches and change-ups that come by. Without knowing what position you play or what stadium, I'd suggest you switch gloves and consider dropping your elbow mid-swing.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
CDC's post said "No Content" or something like that in the title. He was not interested in creating a discussion on whether or not he deserved to be hugged, when someone might hug him, or where said hugging might take place.

It was a joke, this was not (not intentionally anyway).

[/ QUOTE ]

The "No Content" excuse is a joke. You couldn't tell what this post was going to be before you opened it? I don't care if people make posts like this but you can't just pick and choose which ones are suitable for posting and which aren't based on who you like. Chris can guise his post with whatever "humor" he wants, but he was basically just whining that he is running bad. Just because this guy didn't follow exact forum etiquette doesn't mean he needs to be berated or told that his post was "a joke" whether intentionally or no. I agree that he is probably not a winner in the game he lost 400 bb in, and I don't really like whining posts or bad beat stories either, but let's at least be consistent with the way we reply to people.
-James

[bdk3clash]

I can't believe that people are saying that you're "too tight," as if the reason someone would be down 400 BBs after 17,000 hands at 2/4 is that you don't play JTo on the button after 3 limpers or whatever. It's because you're experiencing the mother of all downswings or your postflop play is bad. Likely both.

Being "too tight" is a reason you'd be "winning but not crushing", not a reason you'd be losing.

[scrub]

[ QUOTE ]
The "No Content" excuse is a joke. You couldn't tell what this post was going to be before you opened it? I don't care if people make posts like this but you can't just pick and choose which ones are suitable for posting and which aren't based on who you like. Chris can guise his post with whatever "humor" he wants, but he was basically just whining that he is running bad. Just because this guy didn't follow exact forum etiquette doesn't mean he needs to be berated or told that his post was "a joke" whether intentionally or no. I agree that he is probably not a winner in the game he lost 400 bb in, and I don't really like whining posts or bad beat stories either, but let's at least be consistent with the way we reply to people.
-James

[/ QUOTE ]

I feel like I'm doing this way too much lately, but I'm going to chime in and say that James hit the nail on the head. I was reading through the thread and composing a very similar post, but he beat me to it...

I think it's also important to note that the most vocal advocates of a less cluttered forum are the ones who clutter it by constantly bumping useless threads like this one.

I like the good natured OT stuff on this board, but one thread featuring 100 replies from a bunch of self-righteous mediocre 3/6 multitablers picking on the new guy is more of an eyesore than 10 stupid posts that don't get bumped and fall off the front page.

I'm happy to see CDC's post get a lot of replies because the replies are pleasant to read. But this post should have gotten one corteous reply explaining where the post belonged, and then been allowed to die a quiet death.

scrub

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Just because this guy didn't follow exact forum etiquette doesn't mean he needs to be berated or told that his post was "a joke"

[/ QUOTE ]
I guess I worded that poorly. I mean that the thread in general was a joke, mainly because its just not useful at all.

What has come of it so far? 400 bb downswings were bad, multitabling before you're winning 5 bb/100 is bad, I am stupid. No more than 2 of those things could possibly be true and none af them are particularly helpful to anyone.

As far as this constant reference to Chris' post...I really felt like that was a joke, a parody, whatever. He posted it at like 5 am and probably assumed it would die pretty quickly. I dunno, maybe I'm wrong. But this one seems like people are trying to make real rationalizations and conclusions from numbers that are pretty much useless. Its something that happens entirely too often for what it brings to the forum, nothing.

[Evan]

I agree that this thread is entirely too long. I think I was the first reply and I probably wasn't all that cutious but I basically said what you're talking about if I recal.

I have this semi- hopeless goal each time I respond to one of these posts that by saying that it sould go somewhere else the next one will go elsewhere. Maybe that's stupid, I don't know. Maybe I should stop doing that.

[sfer]

I think you just need to get laid.

[Evan]

Yea. I really do. I did hook up with a girl last night at a party though, so I'm getting close. Maybe I should post my Sex Tracker stats and you guys can tell me why I'm not getting laid enough.

VPIP: 35 I'm a lot looser in this game
PFR: 6 I don't think I'm being aggressive enough
WTSD: 20 I think I'm getting pushed out by too much action
W$SD: 70 I think I'm making some bad plays near the end

So tell me guys, what should I do to get laid more?

[helpmeout]

So you think its better to just say sorry those stats are meaningless, please post a bunch of random hands so we can look at.

I'd prefer post your stats, then have people make an educated guess on where you are going wrong. Sure sometimes the stats dont mean much but a lot of the time they do. It looks pretty obvious that he is overplaying hands dont you think?

Now go back and look at those areas then post hands.

[sfer]

I've heard you're under-rolled

[Evan]

Awesome response. I was trying to figure out what you would say after I posted this, you did not disappoint.

[bisonbison]

So you think its better to just say sorry those stats are meaningless, please post a bunch of random hands so we can look at.

I've already made several lengthy posts about this, but let me reiterate one last time: the person seeking help has to pick out hands. That's it. Not random hands. Representative hands that indicate an example of a portion of your game that you think requires work.

If you post hands and hear "this is standard", then you post a different type of hand and either get feedback which shows "yeah, I need to work on this" or "this is standard", and so on and so forth.

It's learning this process that makes a lot of the SS posters who graduated from micro so valuable.

If you don't know how to identify the problem areas in your game (either through public feedback or through self-analysis), I don't see how you're going to be helped by someone throwing darts at the wall and hoping to hit something relevant.

[Danenania]

I don't think you are necessarily a loser in this game but a 400BB downswing basically proves that if you are a winner, it isn't by very much.

The real place for your question I think is the Probability forum, not because it isn't relevant here but because you will get better answers, because those guys know the statistical calculations required to tell you exactly what you need to know.

"Evan said himself that he was on a 200BB downswing - well, if it can happen once it can happen twice."

A statement like this really demonstrates a hole in your understanding of how poker works statistically. The probability of a winning player having a 200bb downswing is radically different from the probability of a winning player having a 400bb downswing. It's not in the same ballpark, state, or galaxy.

My best guess is that you play fine when things are going your way, but if you start running poorly you go on tilt without realizing it. This would explain your 38k hands of 2BB/100 if they were uneventful, and also explain your meltdown.

Good luck improving your game and turning your downswing around.

[Danenania]

You make good points but I don't think you can say that "throwing darts" is the best a good poster can do when analyzing stats. I don't like PT posts either but I have seem some pretty amazing replies on those threads as far as suggesting what might be going wrong. For a person with weak self-evaluation skills, I'm sure these sorts of responses can be very enlightening.

[Evan]

[ QUOTE ]
Even after this streak I still have an overall win rate of 2BB/100 for the 38k 2/4 hands

[/ QUOTE ]
I just did the math on this. Your winrate for your first 20k hands was therefore 5.8 bb/100. Is this what you had?

Hard to belive you could go from +5.8 to -2.22 in consectutice stretched of ~20k hands.

[bisonbison]

You're right. If you post the entire big stat block, you can pick stuff up. I just think the discussions tend to settle around people's ideas of "ideal stats", sacrificing game context, the interrelatedness of the different stats, and the actual actions and thought processes that make the stats.

[Danenania]

Yes definitely. That's why I don't like them, but if people did a better job in discussing then they could be better.

[sthief09]

this thread sucks

[Evan]

I think that 10 hand posts would do a lot more to help someone's game then posting every single stat that PT can spit out. Its really amazing the wealth of poker strategy knowledge here and what it can do to improve a player.

[David BB]

I'm in a tough situation here. The more I tell you I'm convinced that I'm a solid winning player the more you're going to think I'm in denial /images/graemlins/wink.gif

I realise that when a random person shows up here and tells about a 400BB losing streak odds are that person is doing something very wrong. Naturally you're suspicious. But seriously, don't worry about me.

[ QUOTE ]
b. The clearest red flag in the stats you've provided is Won $ at SD, which is low, which indicates that you may be calling down too much. This is really the only red flag.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or possibly an unending string of suckouts and second best hands in large pots? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I admit that I didn't post this with the intention of getting feedback on my game. I was more interested in hearing if any of you had gone through similar streaks (which is why I decided to post in this forum). I provided the stats PT as reference not as something to discuss.

So maybe this is a bad beat post as Evan suggested, and maybe it is the wrong forum. But it looks to me like the forum nazis are cluttering this forum up much more than the few people posting in the wrong place.

[David BB]

Sounds right. I was certainly running well before this streak startet but not THAT well.

[David BB]

I was going to until the last string of replies.

We aren't getting anywhere so sure. Let it die /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[David BB]

Oh, one last thing.

Luckily I kept a very solid bankroll of 2000BB when this streak started so I was never in any danger of going bust. Not that I thought I would ever need that much but I just hadn't needed it for living expenses so hadn't withdrawn my winnings for a while.

What I'm trying to say is that I will never feel safe again with much less than 1000BB unless I'm willing to move down. I'm sure most of you who play for a living keep similar bankroll but if you don't its something to consider.

Anything can happen.

[bisonbison]

The more I tell you I'm convinced that I'm a solid winning player the more you're going to think I'm in denial

You should really post in Probability and ask: how often should a player who wins at a rate of XBB/100 hands expect a -400BB swing, where X = -1, 0, 1, 2, and 3.

For what it's worth, I think the observation (danemania?) that you may be a fair-weather player may be on point. You may have an a-game that will win you good money, but you may be easily pushed off your a-game by bad results, and your off-game may be a d-game.

Everyone is telling you all they can when they say: this kind of streak in a game as beatable (if admittedly variable) as Party 2/4 is very rare, and gets rarer as you move from "I am a winning player at 0.1BB/100" to "I am a winning player at 2BB/100".