Peak performance poll

[Phat Mack]

How long can you maintain peak performance in a poker game?

[MEbenhoe]

Are we talking online or B&M? My answer would be different depending, and I think that would be true for everybody.

[Phat Mack]

Are we talking online or B&M?

Good point. Let's say B&M.

[Sredni Vashtar]

Phat Mack,

I went with 4-5 hours for B&M. Way less for online. I consider peak performance watching all the action intensely, which gets tiring. I can maintain high level performance much longer by just playing slightly modified default strategies, but not "peak".

I assume you were referring to poker playing. Haven't tried the other thing while playing poker, yet.

SV.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Phat Mack,

I went with 4-5 hours for B&M. Way less for online. I consider peak performance watching all the action intensely, which gets tiring. I can maintain high level performance much longer by just playing slightly modified default strategies, but not "peak".

I assume you were referring to poker playing. Haven't tried the other thing while playing poker, yet.

SV.

[/ QUOTE ]

I gotta agree with you here. I think the people who are voting for 8-9 and higher, either aren't properly evaluating there own true peak performance, or they dont actually understand what peak performance means.

[PokerFink]

I gotta agree with you here. I think the people who are voting for 8-9 and higher, either aren't properly evaluating there own true peak performance, or they dont actually understand what peak performance means.

I disagree with this and the quoted post. It is imperative to watch every move in the first hour or two to get a read, and obviously as new players sit down. But as you develope a feel for the table and each player, it becomes less important to watch EVERY move.

I play my best when I have a read, which allows me to get comfortable (literally), sit back, and just play. I still look at every showdown, every pot worth a damn, etc. But it's possible to play peak for 8-9 hours even if you're not watching EVERY motion EVERY player makes, since you've been playing with them for several hours.

[HTML Samurai]

For me, it also depends how long I have been up, but I am going to assume that I am well rested before setting down for any decent amount of time. I voted 6-7, but thinking back, that might have been a little optimistic...

[Phat Mack]

I went with 4-5 hours for B&M.

I did some work on this a couple of years ago. I've got playing logs that cover many years. I entered a lot of them into spreadsheets and data bases, then played with the data by graphing hourly results and session results against session lengths. I came to the conclusion that I played my best for between 4 and 5 hours, with a noticable decline beginning at 6 hours.

I have a lot of doubts about the data, however. Things like going broke in 15 minutes, having a game break early, or having a whale sit at the table in hour five would skew the results, and I don't know how to account for such things.

When I was in 20's and played a lot of stud, I was convinced that I started to fade after three hours, but that was just subjective interpretation. I don't get to play much stud any more, and I've aged out of a lot of ADD problems, but I think I was probably right. I used to piss off a lot of players with my three-hour hops.

I assume you were referring to poker playing. Haven't tried the other thing while playing poker, yet.

Poker playing?

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
When I was in 20's and played a lot of stud, I was convinced that I started to fade after three hours, but that was just subjective interpretation.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is actually an important point. I use to play stud long before I tried Hold'em. Now I have no hard data, aside from my memory, but I am certain that playing 7-stud took more effort and energy than Hold'em so operating at peak performance was more demanding and could be maintained only for shorter periods. Other parameters to factor in are amount of shorthand play and knowing the majority of your opponents before sitting down, as opposed to cracking the safes on a bunch of new faces.

Shorthand play of pot-limit Omaha is also very taxing. On the other hand, playing low-limit Omaha 8 is a snap. In fact, I can play winning Omaha 8, watch baseball and keep a scorecard, read a book, write a love letter, listen to music, evaluate indefinite integrals, and compose villainous screeds in my head for latter posting on 2+2, all at the same time. This may seem a miraculous feat to some but in reality is just a mundane accomplishment in the ever evolving and interesting life of Le Misanthrope . Only Vince L. (or perhaps El Diablo) could do more at the same time – probably by having a monstrous argument with the person seated next to him at the table.

/images/graemlins/smirk.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Le Misanthrope

EDIT: On the serious side, I said 6-7 hours. If young and rested this is certaintly within reason. But some other parameters would need to be met and those parameters would vary depending on type of game etc., etc.

[MEbenhoe]

[ QUOTE ]
I play my best when I have a read, which allows me to get comfortable (literally), sit back, and just play. I still look at every showdown, every pot worth a damn, etc. But it's possible to play peak for 8-9 hours even if you're not watching EVERY motion EVERY player makes, since you've been playing with them for several hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

This shows a misunderstanding in what playing at peak performance means. Playing at peak performance, isn't just playing at a high level, or playing winning poker. When someone asks how long can you play at peak performance, they are asking you how long can you maintain playing at your absolute best (the peak of your ability). While I believe many of us can still play at a high level or at least play winning poker 8 hours into a session, at this point you will not be playing at 100% of your ability. It may only be a slight decline, but thats still a decline.

[Reef]

whoever said 30+ is full of crap

[Phat Mack]

In fact, I can play winning Omaha 8, watch baseball and keep a scorecard, read a book, write a love letter, listen to music, evaluate indefinite integrals, and compose villainous screeds in my head for latter posting on 2+2, all at the same time.

Finally, a cogent explanation of your posting policy. If you are composing posts during an O8 game, with all its miraculous-suckouts and bad beats, your unflagging good cheer and polyanna-ish optimism for the human condition are easily understood.

Ex-PFC Wintergreen /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Pepsquad]

[ QUOTE ]
whoever said 30+ is full of crap

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[PokerFink]

[ QUOTE ]
This shows a misunderstanding in what playing at peak performance means. Playing at peak performance, isn't just playing at a high level, or playing winning poker. When someone asks how long can you play at peak performance, they are asking you how long can you maintain playing at your absolute best (the peak of your ability). While I believe many of us can still play at a high level or at least play winning poker 8 hours into a session, at this point you will not be playing at 100% of your ability. It may only be a slight decline, but thats still a decline.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps you're right. But I feel that sometimes, after an hour or two, I am able to hit a comfort zone, a groove, where I feel that I am playing my very best. And I can often maintain this for an extended period.

[Cyrus]

In Blackjack, a card counter (straight up) is below his all time high approximately 98% of the time. This means that 98% of the time, that player can moan and groan about how he "useta have more".

I don't know the respective percentage for Poker.

Does anyone?

[Sentric]

I agree with much of what everyone else is saying about PEAK performance, but I dont think very many people play this way for more than three hours at a time. When I was putting in 40+ hours at foxwoods, I would treat it like a job with a couple of 30 minute- 45 minutes, to refresh myself. This is pretty much peak time for me, I would find it hard to make much more than rent money only playing for 4 or five hours a day unless your playing is some really soft games.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, playing low-limit Omaha 8 is a snap. In fact, I can play winning Omaha 8, watch baseball and keep a scorecard, read a book, write a love letter, listen to music, evaluate indefinite integrals, and compose villainous screeds in my head for latter posting on 2+2, all at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking about this a little more last night. I sat down at a very good low-limit O8 game, won the first hand, and then started folding. Once every round or two I would get a playable hand, which would immediately be pronounced dead on the flop. Since I've been thinking about the life-span of mental acuity lately, I was paying attention to how my brain was functioning. After a couple of hours of routine folds, I noticed that my attention was definitely slipping, and after two and a half hours I was pretty much in a coma. I was forced to get up.

But then I started thinking. What if I had a ballgame & scorecard (a perfect activity for this O8 game), some calculable calculus, love letters or villanous screeds to work on? Not only would the structure and composition of the game allow me to work on such projects, but the converse would be true: the performance of these activities would (by keeping my mind active) allow me to continue playing the game.

When I posted the question about maintaining peak performance, I envisioned situations where continuous mental activity would tire the mind. But how many poker sessions are like this? Maybe, as in other things, it is inactivity that causes fatigue. I wonder if a regimen of mental activity conducted at the poker table could prolong peak mental performance.

[Ray Zee]

i have always found that i am at my best,thinking wise anyway, shortly after waking up from a full nights sleep. so i tend to play around that time. once i saw a study that confirmed this.
then i quit when i feel i am getting tired or losing interest. sometimes leaving and walking around or whatever may prolong it a bit. but if you are playing against competition, you are better off quitting and resting and coming back fresh than playing tired for long hours.
8 hours is my limit. over many years of playing, and many times i played long sessions of 16 hours or more, i have found the time after about ten or twelve were worthless. and ended up sleeping through the next good game. or not being able to come back fresh and beat the same tired players.

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
But then I started thinking. What if I had a ballgame & scorecard (a perfect activity for this O8 game), some calculable calculus, love letters or villanous screeds to work on? Not only would the structure and composition of the game allow me to work on such projects, but the converse would be true: the performance of these activities would (by keeping my mind active) allow me to continue playing the game.


[/ QUOTE ]

My conclusion also. At least about Omaha 8. The game became more endurable for me. Is it a bad omen for you that you came to a similar conclusion at the proding of Le Misanthrope. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[ QUOTE ]
When I posted the question about maintaining peak performance, I envisioned situations where continuous mental activity would tire the mind. But how many poker sessions are like this? Maybe, as in other things, it is inactivity that causes fatigue. I wonder if a regimen of mental activity conducted at the poker table could prolong peak mental performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting notion. And perhaps applicable to certain games under certian conditions. But also entirely dependent on the particular individual, in my opinion.

This as certainly been an interesting thread and exchange of ideas.

-Zeno

[Stever]

After 140 votes (after I voted) the chart is showing a nice distribution patern. except for a big blip for 30+. Obviously they are full of Crap.

Stever
www.TheManWithTheAxe.com (http://www.TheManWithTheAxe.com)

[2ndGoat]

I don't know if your proposed mental regimen would help the average winning player or not, though I've heard people claim they can't one-table online as well as they can two-table, because of that inactivity factor. Regardless, I do believe there are ways to stretch your peak playing time. I've heard that many world-class chess players adhere to not only grueling study but a strenuous physical fitness routine as well, both of which ward off fatigue. (And in the interest of full discolsure, this is just hearsay). I believe they focus/think way harder than we do while they're playing, and maybe they're on to something.

I know that since I began playing seriously, my endurance has increased a lot. To bein with, I could play at 95% of my peak for about an hour online playing one or two tables. Now I can manage about 6 hours of 4-tabling at 95%+, and I have confidence I can play solid winning poker past 8 hours, though I never play more than that. I'll admit that pokertracker helps with that a lot, doing a good deal of the thinking for me. I'm going to begin a slow climb to 8 tables (with two large monitors) fairly soon... I'll consider it an unqualified success if it decreases both my endurance and win rate per table by less than 20%.

2ndGoat

[2ndGoat]

I love when I get my sleep pattern rotated oddly enough that I wake up fully refreshed at 12:30am, can play through a couple peak hours, and then stick around with whatever living dead remains seated. Occasionally backfires if mostly better players hang around past 3:30, but usually seems to work really well til the morning crowds shows. The bad players don't change their play all that much except for the one that just has to get back to even, but the tired good ones are usually a little less feisty/deceptive across the board.

I'm with you Ray, 8 hours is plenty.

2ndGoat

[TStoneMBD]

i can maintain peak performance where i have not missed 1 hand for an entire 9 hour session, in which i saw everything that happened. that is not always the case, but i can definitely maintain peak performance for 9 hours.

[Bellagibro]

There is a tradeoff between putting in the hours and playing at an optimal level. It is much like playing one table or multitabling. You may give up a little but if your earn per hour is still reasonable, then by all means keep on playing.

[The T.A.]

My normal session at the B&M usually lasts about 7 hours, playing at my peak the entire time. I probably only miss three or so hands due to bathroom breaks.

With coffee at regular intervals, a 10-11 hour session at my peak isn't a problem. Anything longer, and yeah, my focus might start to dip. But if there's a good table, there's no point leaving. /images/graemlins/smile.gif