average POTS won per hour...or..."patience, patience, patience"

[CaptainNurple]

So I realize that in any normal poker discussion, it's a horrible mistake to ever think in terms of "number of pots won", because, after all, you could "win" 100 tiny pots and still blow your whole stack chasing bad draws.

However, my question has to do with patience. Namely: I need to learn it. People talk about big bets won per hour and the like, but the concept itself is, of course, somewhat deceptive in that you could be winning 3 big bets per hour long-term, but you could often be going several hours without really winning any big pots...or at least, that's what I assume.

So, that being said, I'm wondering how long (on average) winning players tend to go between winning those big pots that are the whole purpose of all that waiting. If I'm sitting around for two hours without winning a big pot, is that normal? What about three hours? four? I realize that one of the keys to being a winning player is having that PATIENCE to wait for the big hands, knowing that they will come, and I think if I had an idea of just how long that "wait" normally is, it would help me fold those marginal draws a lot more easily.

I really feel like I'm at that point where if I could just knock out those one or two "tilt" hands per hour, I'd be into solidly profitable play. But when I sit there getting trash hand after hand after hand, I start to get nervous about the blinds and then all that talk of "big bets per hour" starts floating through my head and before I know it I'm in there chasing a dumb hand and there goes another few chips I should have saved...

[Phat Mack]

So, that being said, I'm wondering how long (on average) winning players tend to go between winning those big pots that are the whole purpose of all that waiting.

This is such a tough question to answer. So much depends on the format and the players. In a "normal" B&M limit game, my guess would be that a "big" pot might come along every 3 or 4 hours, on average. In order for a big pot to occur, you need the right hand, the right flop, and opponents with action hands. When I first started playing, nothing was more discouraging than to have the first two, and not have the third.

I've never noticed an even distribution of big pots. Twenty hours without one wouldn't raise an eyebrow. I've always considered myself a "big-pot" O8 player, but as I've learned the game I've found more and more ways to win small pots, and they now make up a large part of my winnings. I've never really thought about it until now: I don't know what percentages of my earnings come from which type pots. (I'd be interested in hearing from other posters with thoughts on this! I can say for a fact that it depends on style of play, but there's probably some sort of range.)

I really feel like I'm at that point where if I could just knock out those one or two "tilt" hands per hour, I'd be into solidly profitable play.

You absolutely must do this. One "tilt" hand every 8 hours is too many. The bad O8 players win more big pots than the good ones, they just give the money back. If your giving your money back on "tilt" hands, you can't win.

[JoshuaMayes]

I don't have any solid statistical data, so all I can give you is what I perceive based on my experience. I two-table PLO8 and estimate that I win 1-2 big pots per hour, on average.

[GooperMC]

I totally agree with Phat Mack. The more I play PLO8 the more I learn how to win small pots. I still make the vast majority of my money on large pots but the small post keep me from falling behind. Stealing small pots is like treading water until you can catch that large wave to take you to the big money.

Joshuas numbers seem a little high to me; I usually only make 1 large hand a session (I too play 2 tables and play usually about 1 hours sessions). In fact looking back at my stats I have more sessions where I have 0 notable hands then I have 2 so I would guess that I average about 1 large pot every 1 1/2 hours. However I know that Joshua plays a little looser then I do.

Just to be clear I am calling any pot that's size is > 1 buy in as large.

And I think that you already know that 1 tilt pot in 10 hours of poker is 1 too many.

[gergery]

I wrote an article related to this for the 2+2 magazine that should come out in another month or two.

The basic gist of it is that all the data you need to look at is in pokertracker. It has # hands you played per hour, the # times you saw a flop, the # of hands you won, how often you went to showdown, etc.

You can multiply all that out to get an “average per hour” of how often you and each of your opponents are winning a hand before showdown, winning at showdown, losing before showdown, and losing at showdown. If you make some simplifying assumptions on how big a pot typically is at showdown and before and know your winrate, you can get some assumptions on how profitable a showdown hand is and how profitable a non-showndown hand is. Then make an assumption or two on variability of showdown hand size.

So you don’t need to guess – you can say, “On average I win 3.2 hand per hour at showdown, 1.1 of those is >14BB, and the showdown hands account for 73% of my profits”. Add a little standard deviation from PT in to that and you could also probably say, “it is 38% likely that I will go 3 hours in a given 25 hour block without winning one of those 14BB pots”

Incidentally, the delta from # hands won at showdown minus # hands lost at showdown has by far the biggest correlation with winrate of these set of statistics (much more important, than say, # hands won before showdown, or ratio of hands won at showdown to before showdown,etc.). So my analysis would suggest you not focus on "when i can win a monster pot next?", or even "how can i win this little pot no one wants" – but instead focus on "how can i make sure i'm winning money when i see showdowns"

--Greg

[CaptainNurple]

[ QUOTE ]
And I think that you already know that 1 tilt pot in 10 hours of poker is 1 too many.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

I really feel like I'm at that point where if I could just knock out those one or two "tilt" hands per hour, I'd be into solidly profitable play.

You absolutely must do this. One "tilt" hand every 8 hours is too many. The bad O8 players win more big pots than the good ones, they just give the money back. If your giving your money back on "tilt" hands, you can't win.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, at the risk of being too broad, how do I develop that discipline? I've heard it said that "discipline is an advanced skill" but it's just so frustrating because I KNOW that one of the biggest leaks in my game are those occasional hands I play when I know I should probably just fold but end up throwing chips at hoping to catch my draw or whatever. It's like there's this gap between knowing that discipline is my problem vs. actually believing that I can afford to throw away those marginal hands on the faith that the good hands will come. As though there's this disconnect between my rational self that says "you know how to play winning poker, just be patient" and my irrational self that also sort of knows how to play poker but also is a little bit bored and also likes winning those big pots and yeah by the way also likes that feeling of catching a card, blahblahblah. How do I smite that irrational self that's poisoning my game?! /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[toots]

I'm finding that it's one of those "If it hurts when you do that, stop doing that" sort of things.

I think I'm getting it.

I've spent hours at a table, getting pretty much nothing. Either no cards, middling cards (A2xx ss), or good cards (A23K ds) that just don't hold up. I end up getting bored, chasing crap, and when I finally hit that monster hand two hours later, it pretty much just pays off the leakage.

I think the discipline comes of being tired of leaking chips, more than anything else.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
It's like there's this gap between knowing that discipline is my problem vs. actually believing that I can afford to throw away those marginal hands on the faith that the good hands will come. As though there's this disconnect between my rational self that says "you know how to play winning poker, just be patient" and my irrational self that also sort of knows how to play poker but also is a little bit bored and also likes winning those big pots and yeah by the way also likes that feeling of catching a card, blahblahblah. How do I smite that irrational self that's poisoning my game?!

[/ QUOTE ]

Get a pocket notebook. When you catch yourself playing a hand that you shouldn't, write down the hand and what you were thinking when you played it; e.g. "Hadn't played a hand in 30 minutes;" "Fool just won a monster pot with junk;" "Stuck and needed to catch up," etc.

Give these tilts names: e.g. "Boredom Tilt," "Fool Tilt," "Stuck Tilt."

Then, the next time a tilt-provoking situation arises, identify it as such before it influences your play, as in "I haven't played a hand in 30 minutes, I have to watch out for 'Stuck Tilt.' " What do you do when you identify the situation? Make yourself totally aware of it. What I do is laugh at it. You might want to bear down, take a break, start telling obscene jokes; whatever works for you. If you identify a tilt-provoking situation and still tilt, quit for the day. It al sounds easy: it is not.

Another thing you have to know is what a marginal hand is. Then you have to know what a marginal flop is. Is a Js Jh 3s 2h a marginal hand? It is on the button in a family pot: anywhere else it may be pure trash. Is a As Ah 2s 3h a marginal hand? If it flops the 3d 4d 5d, and it's bet and raised to you, it may not reach a high enough level to be termed "marginal." It takes a lot of study and experience to know what is marginal. When you play a marginal hand you must ask yourself whether your trying to expoit a small edge, or whether you're deceiving yourself.

The beautiful thing about O8 is that some monster pots are won by suckers playing pure trash. When the table sees how easy it is, they love to jump on the bandwagon. It's a profitable game for a non-bandwagon-jumper.

Are you playing live or online?

[CaptainNurple]

That's good advice. Thanks. I'm gonna try the notebook thing.

[ QUOTE ]
Are you playing live or online?

[/ QUOTE ]

Mostly online. I played a B&M game for 4 or 5 hours one day, but the table was REALLY dead, with everyone playing super tight, and I didn't really get many playable hands. Good experience nonetheless, just to get some live practice. It's nice to be able to see the people you're playing against.

But yeah, mostly I play online.