Is this variance?

[djj6835]

Hi
I don't post here much but I've been lurking for quite some time. Just to give you a little backround information, I have been playing the SNGs at Party for a couple of years now. I started out at the 10+1 and gradually worked my way up to the 50+5 games. I played just under 5000 50+5 before I cashed out all of my profits and stopped playing for about a month, at which point I redeposited a few hundred dollars. I once again worked that back up and was playing the 20+2s with an $1800 bankroll. It was just about a month ago that I hit a brick wall. I now have only about $500 left in my bankroll. That equates to a 60 buy-in drop over the course of just under 500 tournaments. I have had numerous bad runs before, but nothing like this. I am beginning to think that this is no longer variance, but that there is something that is seriously wrong with my game. I hope this doesnt come off as some sort of rant, but I'm basically wondering if this downswing is approaching something of statistical significance. Is it not possible for a winning player playing well to run this bad.If so, then I need to completely reevaluate my game. Thanks for any input.

[The Yugoslavian]

There is no way to tell from your paragraph of prose how much of your recent downswing is variance. Some of it surely is variance but some of it could also be tilt or mini-tilt or just bad play.

It is very possible for a winning player to run this bad. Gigabet has run worse I believe and he's clearly a *very* winning player.

It sounds to me that you hadn't run into the dark side of variance much before now.

What are your stats for the ~5000 $55 STTs that you played?? If you were winning at them and have not changed your game dramatically, you should certainly be beating the $22s.

I recommend that you turn your noise filter up and look more at your own HHs. Even better, compare the way you're playing now to how you played when beating the $55s.

60 buyin drops are part of the game. Just be thankful you're not playing limit.

Yugoslav

[XChamp]

I was down about $1,400 over 50,000 hands at NL$100 last year. I am still not sure if it was all variance or some bad play on my part. Regardless I am positive that I am winner at NL$100.

Good luck with that streak. Sounds pretty rough.

[djj6835]

Thanks for the response Yugoslav. In ragards to my stats, I dont have actual stats for the 50+5, but using my total profits compared to approximate number of games, it appears that I had an ROI somewhere between 16% and 19%. It is also good to here that other winning players have experienced similar downswings.
I dont't have any HH for the 50+5 but I have noticed a general difference between how those frequently played out and how the 20+2 are currently playing. I freqently remeber that when I was running well at the 50s I would make it into the money without even having to showdown a single hand. This doesn't seem to the be the case anymore at all. I am frequently having to showdown and win 3 or 4 hands before making it into the money. Could this mean that I am missing some oppurtunities to pick up some chips earlier in the tournament. I generally play very tight early , and start to play at around level 4. I played the exact same way in the 50+5 and had a lot of success. Maybe it is some mini tilt or something, but it just doesnt seem at the moment that the same strategy that I had been using works anymore. I'll take a look at my next few games and see if I do anything that I wasn't doing previously. Thanks again for the response.

[The Yugoslavian]

From reading your posts it sound like your $22 run is just noise. One can certainly run card dead for 500 STTs. I agree it is a bit concerning consideration you were beating the $55s over so many STTs for such a high ROI. I'd just continue to build up and review my HHs consistently to make sure I wasn't tilting.

Yugoslav

[raptor517]

ah, but yugo, i beg to differ. i broke even over 1100 sngs. bwahahahaha. i am positive i am a winning player, with at least a 10% roi. its possible my play turned bad somehow, but i do think that a downswing can last WAYY longer than people think. my brief sng career almost ended with that streak. thankfully, i got back on track, and am now dominating. holla /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[The Yugoslavian]

Yeah, I know.....I'm trying to tell the OP that it's almost surely noise but it's still not a bad idea to check HHs and such (one should be doing this anyway, of course).

I also agree that a downswing can last longer than most people think. Let's all just be thankful we're not playing short handed limit when it happens, /images/graemlins/wink.gif.

Yugoslav

[1C5]

[ QUOTE ]
ah, but yugo, i beg to differ. i broke even over 1100 sngs. bwahahahaha. i am positive i am a winning player, with at least a 10% roi. its possible my play turned bad somehow, but i do think that a downswing can last WAYY longer than people think. my brief sng career almost ended with that streak. thankfully, i got back on track, and am now dominating. holla /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You say you got back on track, did you make any changes in your play or winning again just happened?

[FishBurger]

60 buyins at the $22s ($1320) is a pretty substantial drop. If I ever had that kind of drop I would definitely be examining my game. I think the most I have ever been down at the $22s is between 20-30 buyins, and during those downswings I made some mistakes that caused my downswings to be worse than they should have been.

[johnny005]

I'm in the midst of a 15 buy in drop right now.... Man does it feel like a long time... but when you spend your whole day losing at sng's it really gets to you. I cant wait to go on one of these 30 losing streak :P
I feel you pain djj

[HC5831]

I'm a successful $50+5 player with a ROI of 29% over 400 tournies. For 180 of those 400 tournies I broke even. The luck finally turned around for me a week and a half ago and I am again on a tear.

You need to be reviewing your hand histories to make sure you are making the right plays. That is all that matters. Over the 180 tournies I was making the right moves, but I was having horrible luck. I checked my HH's to make sure I played the right move to be certain.

I've also played 100 games at the $10, 100 at the $20, and 300 at the $30 levels. I had a 40%+ ROI over all those levels. I had 1 break even stretch of 80 games in the 30's, but the 180 game streak was my worst by far.

You should know if you are making the right moves if you have played 5k 50's. In addition, you cost yourself a lot of money by starting over at the 10's. You should have put in $1500 and started back up in the 50's. I've taken a month break many times, and you don't lose much. It only takes a couple tournies to get back in the grouve. That being said, I think that your confidence is shot. I wouldn't reconmend playing at the 50's after this losing streak. You want to go back up on a positive note.

Finally, the 20's play a lot different than the 50's. I suspect that you have not adjusted your play enough to the lower level. I played 4 $30 tournies when I was on my 180 break even streak and I had to adjust my play conciderably. The 200 less starting chip difference alone, changes things.

HC

ps. I have not had a drop of more than 30 buys ins playing sngs.

[djj6835]

Thanks for all the replies. In response to a few of the posts... [ QUOTE ]
You should have put in $1500 and started back up in the 50's.

[/ QUOTE ]
I used the profits I cashed out to pay for school and such so I was limited as to what I could put back into my account. I also agree that the 20s play a lot different than the 50s. One thing I have noticed in the relatively small number I have played is that blind stealing is very difficult. I probably haven't won a single pot by the time we hit level 4 and I have around 700 chips left with probably around 6 players or more. This always puts me in a difficult spot, especially lately when I have been running completely card dead. The biggest problem I seem to face is that everytime I have a decent spot to steal or play a hand a few players limp in in front of me. Just to provide an example of a very common situation..
I am on the button or SB with A 10 and about 600 chips with 50 100 blinds. Obviously if it is folded to me I would push, but at the 20s it seems that is is very common to still have people limping, even this late in the game. Two or three players with stacks ranging from 900 to 1500 will often limp in front of me. I have just been treating these limpers as raises, and I muck my hand, is this a mistake?
I realize I probably have zero folding equity, but I might actually have the best hand here. I remember someon posting something a while ago talking about good SNG players dont necessarily take advantage of good hands, but good oppurtunities. This made sanse to me when I was playing the 50s. People actually folded and I could take advantage of these good oppurtunities to build my stack. I'm just not seeing many good oppurtunites at the 20s when the cards are completely cold. I must be completely missing something here. Any input would be appreciated.

[lorinda]

I call Lorinda's Paradox.

Sorry.

Lori

[djj6835]

[ QUOTE ]
I call Lorinda's Paradox.



[/ QUOTE ]
I apologize, but I'm going to ask the dumb question here.
What exactly is your paradox?

[ZebraAss]

*GASP*

[lorinda]

[ QUOTE ]
Lorinda's paradox states that an event that should happen to an individual once per lifetime should be posted daily on 2+2 and makes evaluating someone's skill level from a one-off post about a bad streak impossible.


[/ QUOTE ]

Lori

[djj6835]

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lorinda's paradox states that an event that should happen to an individual once per lifetime should be posted daily on 2+2 and makes evaluating someone's skill level from a one-off post about a bad streak impossible.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lol, gotcha.
I supose that paradox actually answers my intial question which was simply "can this happen to a winning player?" I understand you can't possibly determine any skill level from a bad streak, but seeing that a downswing like this is common is good to hear.

[bball904]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for all the replies. In response to a few of the posts... [ QUOTE ]
You should have put in $1500 and started back up in the 50's.

[/ QUOTE ]
I used the profits I cashed out to pay for school and such so I was limited as to what I could put back into my account. I also agree that the 20s play a lot different than the 50s. One thing I have noticed in the relatively small number I have played is that blind stealing is very difficult. I probably haven't won a single pot by the time we hit level 4 and I have around 700 chips left with probably around 6 players or more. This always puts me in a difficult spot, especially lately when I have been running completely card dead. The biggest problem I seem to face is that everytime I have a decent spot to steal or play a hand a few players limp in in front of me. Just to provide an example of a very common situation..
I am on the button or SB with A 10 and about 600 chips with 50 100 blinds. Obviously if it is folded to me I would push, but at the 20s it seems that is is very common to still have people limping, even this late in the game. Two or three players with stacks ranging from 900 to 1500 will often limp in front of me. I have just been treating these limpers as raises, and I muck my hand, is this a mistake?
I realize I probably have zero folding equity, but I might actually have the best hand here. I remember someon posting something a while ago talking about good SNG players dont necessarily take advantage of good hands, but good oppurtunities. This made sanse to me when I was playing the 50s. People actually folded and I could take advantage of these good oppurtunities to build my stack. I'm just not seeing many good oppurtunites at the 20s when the cards are completely cold. I must be completely missing something here. Any input would be appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me see if I've got this straight. You cashed out your 40-50k (from 16-19% ROI over 5000 55's) you've won in the last 2 years to pay for school, so you're too cash strapped to play higher than 22's. Ok.

I call bball904's subterfuge.

[Scuba Chuck]

OP, it is my opinion, based on your comments, that there is a greater than slight possibility that your skills are rusty. Reviewing your game and your strategy are in order. In fact, I think reviewing your game is always in order, especially during down streaks. Many a bankroll has been rebuilt on the $22s. Much can be learned about these damn games at this level.

I think it's a mistake to **hope** that this is a downswing, and not to re-evaluate your game.

Scuba
-who always goes on a bad streak every time he learns something new.

[Slim Pickens]

Asking "Is this variance?" will never get you a satisfactory answer. Here's why:

1) In order to generate a statistical confidence interval for your results over the first 5000 55's you played, we have to assume your play is equal to that of a hypothetical player, playing in an infinite universe of SnG's, whose finish distribution [1st,2nd,3rd]=[x,y,z] and whose results are randomly determined conforming to [x,y,z] over an infinite number of trials. There's huge assumptions in there. You may not be anywhere close to that hypothetical player because your skill or your opponents' skill may change over time. You may wake up with 200 fewer brain cells than you had when you went to sleep. Really, it's impossible to tell what [x,y,z] is, and the only way to derive any statistics from your previous play is to assume we know [x,y,z].

2) We'll never get everyone to agree on what constitutes a statisically significant confidence interval. Given enough time everything will happen. I'll win fifty tournaments in a row and lose a million in a row. It's just a matter of when. So what seems "significant" to you? 50%, 90%, 95%, 99%? Coupled with 1), this hardly seems worth doing.

[djj6835]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me see if I've got this straight. You cashed out your 40-50k (from 16-19% ROI over 5000 55's) you've won in the last 2 years to pay for school, so you're too cash strapped to play higher than 22's. Ok.

I call bball904's subterfuge.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I just noticed I mistyped in my initial post. That 5000 SNGs was total played including all the ones at much lower stakes initially. I'm not exactly sure the total number I have played at the 50s. I would guess it is around 1000, but not anywhere close to 5000. My total profits aren't anywhere close to $50K, there are just under $20K. The 16% to 19% number was just an estimate for all games played so I'm not really sure what my ROI is for the 50s, I just know that I was beating them. I am also not completely cash strapped, I just didn't want to make a large deposit. I had succesfully built a bankroll before and I assumed I could do it again. I didn't have any probalems initially, as I turned my $200 redeposit to $1800 in a relatively short amount of time, but that is the point at which I hit this bad run.