1150xbb downswing- Am I a fish

[vintage_paf]

Hi all,
I'm in a 1150xbb downswing at 1/2 right now. Am not sure if it's a combination of bad play and cards or sheer bad play. Am still up about 750 bb for the last 5 weeks,
but this downswing is having me wonder whether i'm turning into a fish.
Any winning players have similar experiences or am i (shudder) the only one?
thanks,
nick

[-Skeme-]

This is a NL forum, but Jesus Christ.. 1,150 BBs? You seriously need to reevaluate your game.

[Niwa]

Are you getting desperate?
Try taking a break and reevaluating your game.

[MarkL444]

is this limit or no limit? either way, that is a huge downswing. there is a VERY good chance that you might not be as good as you think you are. i dont know your story, but just because you were winning doesnt mean you were playing well (no matter how much or for how long you won). best step now is to take a break and re-evaluate your play. i recommend replying to as many hands as possible. posting hands is good too but you will learn a lot more by replying, trust me. most important, it might be tough to come to terms with the fact that you may not be a winning player. dont let your ego get in your way, now is a perfect time to start learning.

gl
mark

[vintage_paf]

yes,
i'm sadly but surely pondering the great big possibility that i'm turning into a fish. This is NL btw.
i'm not really sure what's going wrong. I think my small pot play is ok, I'm pretty sure i'm + EV there, not making any stupid mistakes. It's in the big pots that i have a lot of problems now i guess.
just today my all in hands were
ak vs 99 preflop(called the all in) - i had ak and didnt improve.
99 vs a5 preflop(called the all in) - board came q884q to invalidate my 9s
44 vs 99 on 49q board
more details if requested.
i'm fine with the other two hands but the 44 vs 99 is the one that's bothering me.
now action goes 3 limpers into the pot.
check check to me.
I bet 4xbb
sb raises to 8xbb.
flop comes up 49q 2 clubs.
i push.
now sb is tight.
I put him on q9, maybe even q4.
now
obviously in this case it wasnt a smart move.
but this was shorthanded play, 6max, and i'm wondering if it's wise to push with bottom set on uncoordinated flops almost all the time. is it +ev(assuming u get a caller or two) or is there a better play to maximize profit while minimizing occurences such as the above?
i by no means claim i'm a good player and am looking very very hard at my play to plug the myriad leaks.

[sourbeaver]

[ QUOTE ]
99 vs a5 preflop(called the all in) - board came q884q to invalidate my 9s

[/ QUOTE ]

errr...

[vintage_paf]

whoops
sorry
1010
instead of qq
my bad
should go to sleep now
not only am i a fish
i'm a fish with bad memory

[vintage_paf]

damn
again
1010 instead of 88
damn let me just get the pokertracker
crap i cant even remember my own damn hands

[vintage_paf]

sigh.
evidently i am a fish. i can't even remember my own hands accurately.

[Rastapopoulos]

I am surprised by the replies in this thread.
I am by no means a good player, unsurprisingly I too experience deep downswings (never this deep though).

But seriously guys, are you (great long run winning players) telling me that you never experience a downswing of 1000BB? Assuming you would play 6-max NL and I suppose you super-brains can play 4 tables decently, 1000BB (assuming 100BB max buy-in) would not be more than 2.5 Buy-ins lost per table.

Sure, the more tables we play the more hands we play and gets us "closer to long-run", but it also lets us experience greater swings per session. I mean seriously, there is a reason that people tend to stick to the 3000BB bankroll rule, some even considering it to be insufficient, depending on the player type you are.

I may be out on a limb here, but a +/- 1000BB swing would sure give you incentives to evaluate your play more thorughly (note, even if you it is a positive one). But if you guys who play far better and have been playing far more hands than me don't experience these types of swings (multi-tabling 6-max), then perhaps that is a sign to evaluate your own play as well?

Please correct me here if I'm completely mistaken, and do let inform me of your reasoning.

[-Skeme-]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you getting desperate?
Try taking a break and reevaluating your game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn't insulting him, you know? As far as me evaluating my own game, I do it constantly. I post hands here and offer my advice frequently. I not only welcome, but encourage other's criticism on my own plays. I discuss hands with my friends aswell as 2+2ers.

And I don't think I've ever dropped more than 1,000 BBs. I of course thought he was talking about Limit, which is why I was so shocked. If you drop 1,000 BBs in Limit, I'd consider reevaluating your game and checking for leaks. 1,000 BBs in NL is only about 5 buyins, which I've dropped before.

[Rastapopoulos]

[ QUOTE ]
sigh.
evidently i am a fish. i can't even remember my own hands accurately.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many hands have you played at that level?
How many hands have you played in your career?
How fast did you make the jumps? (assuming you did not start at 1/2, if you did then perhaps you are a fish after all... /images/graemlins/wink.gif)

[emil3000]

erm, ten buyins rather? and that's quite a bit, if you ask me. it could be just running bad, but i think it's more likely due to some leaks. serios evaluation is needed if you ask me.

[-Skeme-]

Whoops, sorry about that. You're right, that's 10 buyins. And that's quite a lot. Like I said, I'd seriously consider evaluating your game and trying to plug some leaks.

[Rastapopoulos]

Sure, our Hero is do most certainly have some leaks he should plug (don't we all /images/graemlins/wink.gif) but are you guys serious? You don't expect to experience these downswings playing 6-max NL? Other opinions?

My line of reasoning is this: In order to push the slightest edge you've got in a cash-game (quite an important concept) you are often putting a lot of money at stake in near coin-flip situations. Not to seldomly, you are to experience streaks of loosing these. Do you guys really considering loosing say 16 coinflips in a row a sign of leaking? Do you really think that you will not be facing these situations during your poker "career"?

If so, then I would like an answer one of the following two questions:

1. Is there any specific reason to you considering yourself having greater luck in poker than your opponents?

2. How much money in the long run do you expect to be missing out on, when you don't extract maximum value of your plays? (Thus meaning, taking variance of your bankroll into consideration when making decisions)

Don't take my arguments as true, this is just the way I look at it. In this particular situation I don't know about our Hero and his game, and wether he is playing above his head or just having a down swing. But seriously guys, neither do you. I believe academic term for it is called "insufficient information".

Either way, I would not consider the advice to re-evaluate one's game to be a bad advice. We should always do that.

And of course, if I would say that I have lost ~1500BB, the first thing popping up in your head would not be: "Oh, based that I don't know anything about the player, he must be having a normal negative downswing."

However, say that I would post something like "I've won 1500BB the last week, am I the new Doyle?". I can hardly see that you would denote me as an A-class player, just as fast.

[theredpill5]

All-in preflop with 99 ?? The only hands I would put considerable money in preflop with are KK and AA . That's it.

Now if my buy-in was $25, I would consider calling an All-in with 99 from a short stack who had about $3 on him but that's where I draw the line. You are increasing your variance greatly by playing like that. Stop putting so much money in preflop with hands like 99 and things should turn around a little bit.

I've never had a 10 buy-in downswing but I have had 4 or 5 buy-in downswings which is about 400 - 500 BB.

[theredpill5]

I just re-read your original post. The 44 vs 99 hand.

You are playing 6 max NL ? No wonder you are experiencing that big of a downswing. Variance in 6 max is much bigger than full ring.

I don't play 6 max anymore because I got my ass kicked and I didn't complete understand it, either. Ever since I left 6 max, I have made money.

I would suggest leaving 6 max and playing full ring. Lower variance.

Also, you are raising with 44 preflop ? Geez. I guess in 6 max this is appropriate but in full ring, I'd never do it.

[Rastapopoulos]

Not calling an all-in with 99 against A5o (as it was in this case) means that you are giving up a 70/30 run for the money.

Once again, we all must realize that there are no way we can interpret the input we so far have received from hero.

Perhaps the A5o villain in this case was a total nutso who just had bluffed away 2/3 of his stack and have a PFR% of 40 and our Hero had seen him pull of some horrible pre-flop all-in bluffs three hands in a row before this one.

Au contrair, perhaps villain only plays 15% of the hands dealt to him and only raise preflop with AA and KK.

In one of the two examples above, calling is cetainly not -EV. Do you see which one? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
You are increasing your variance greatly by playing like that.

[/ QUOTE ]
Increasing variance is nothing to be afraid of if you are a solid player. There are different playing types. Some very solid winners either go very much + or ver much - when they sit down and play. The only thing is that the negative sessions occur less often than the + ones.

I haven't played 1/2 yet, but I suspect that showing weakness to opponents is a certain way of loosing money on that level. Although I'm not sure.

[ QUOTE ]
Stop putting so much money in preflop with hands like 99 and things should turn around a little bit.

[/ QUOTE ]
What makes you think that?

[sourbeaver]

My biggest downswing over 70k hands must've been around 300BB.

And even then, at least some of it was due to tilt/bad play. So I'd assume a downswing of 1000BB would mean you are not playing at a comfortable level for your current skills or you tilt pretty bad.

[Rastapopoulos]

[ QUOTE ]
My biggest downswing over 70k hands must've been around 300BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's very nice and you should be proud over your low variance!
[ QUOTE ]
And even then, at least some of it was due to tilt/bad play. So I'd assume a downswing of 1000BB would mean you are not playing at a comfortable level for your current skills or you tilt pretty bad.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is to take things too far. 70k hands after all, isn't a life time, but it is a very nice indication to one self that you probably are not WORSE than the vast majority of the players you are up against. This is a key concept in statistics, while you cannot prove that you are a winning player, you don't have evidence that contradicts the assumption that you are a winning player.

I assume you could put yourself in a situation where you play four tables for two weeks or so, where you all of a sudden starts to make second best hands or getting strange play-backs at you. All in all, you experience more difficult hands and more draw-outs appearing close together.

The down-swings I have had have them as well been mainly because of bad play. But I still expect to suffer bitter, reaaaally bitter streaks during my playing time. Not just bad luck, I mean increased difficulties in making the correct decisions, or situations where there is only marginal EV regardless what you do.

[pindawg]

QUIT CALLING ALLINS WITH HANDS THAT ARE SLIGHT FAVORITES OR SLIGHT UNDERDOGS

Sheet man, this ain't the final table of the WSOP

[vintage_paf]

hi red,
no raise with 44, we all limped in to see the flop.
with the 99 vs a5, i was pretty sure he went all in on a random hand as that was the pattern whenever he lost a big pot. not a very good player imho.
with the ak vs 99, i really couldnt fathom why there would be a massive raise preflop with this guy who plays differently with true monsters and ruled out aces or kings. any other ace hand i dominate, and am more than a big favorite with random hands.

[AncientPC]

[ QUOTE ]
Am not sure if it's a combination of bad play and cards or sheer bad play.

[/ QUOTE ]

Both. You cannot lose 10+ buy-ins without tilt involved.

My biggest downswing ever has been ~6 buy-ins. I've only hit it twice and I only play 6-max (and I do LAG it up).

[DaveduFresne]

It is not unusual at all for me to drop 5 buy ins in a single session at NL.

And not to brag, I'm hardly a millionaire, but I do play for a living, so I don't think my variance is out of hand.

I could play differently to lower variance, but I am convinced this would lower my profits.

David

[darkcore]

[ QUOTE ]
QUIT CALLING ALLINS WITH HANDS THAT ARE SLIGHT FAVORITES OR SLIGHT UNDERDOGS

Sheet man, this ain't the final table of the WSOP

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree. tighten up. join full ring games. maybe drop a level until you get more confidence...

...but stop making moves with coinflip hands when you can deal with the variance.

[jonnyUCB]

losing 1000 BBs is huge. Usually by the time I'm down 250BBs I've already been on tilt or soon to be on tilt.

I honestly think OP is suffering from major impatience tilt - my worst enemy. After performing well over a period of time, we all expect good things from ourselves. However, we expect all the short term session to reflect the long term figures. So we take a beat or two, putting our profit for the session in the red, and a landslide begins.

We slap on a few extra tables to pick up good starting hands to get back in the green. However, we dont notice the trade-off we make in our loss of information. Furthermore we make looser calls of value bets - having seemingly won zero hands in a while makes us overplay our hands. Easy to see how over a few sessions this can lead to a huge downswing.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
My biggest downswing over 70k hands must've been around 300BB.

[/ QUOTE ]

BS

[beset7]

300xbb is the biggest swing you've had playing NL over 70k? I guess this is possible if you are sacrificing some EV by playing ueber-tight. What's your standard deviation?

Over the last 10k I played my biggest downswing was about 700xBB. This involved tilt. I think without the tilt I could have probably kept it down around 500-600xBB. That being said, I think 1150xBB is PROBABLY an indication of some problems but a large percentage of it could just be plain out bad luck.

For me 1150 probably wouldn't phase me because I play a lot of PLO where such a swing would just be a bad day at the office. The variance is so much lower in NL that it feels like a vacation for me.

Drop down limits, play full ring, tighten up. Once you've got your confidence back start loosening up and head back to 6max.

[Rastapopoulos]

[ QUOTE ]
You cannot lose 10+ buy-ins without tilt involved.

[/ QUOTE ]
Although most probably due to tilting, I am quite sure you indeed can lose 10 buy-ins without tilt (although I most surely would be tilting), as there in NL don't need to be that many hands played for such a thing to occur. People should really realize this.

A good thing to do is of course to stop playing when you're lost a couple of buy-ins if you start feeling that the tilt is getting to you.

But I seriously hope that you all don't think you're made of steel just because you never got fu**ed by variance.
Sooner or later, it will come... You might as well be prepared for it.

[ThePortuguee]

I dont have time to read the whole thread right now, so if this is reduntant to the thread, I'm sorry. But there are a couple things i wanted to say.

10 Buy-ins IS a lot.

You shouldn't be as worried about extracting the most possible out of your opponents as you should be about spewing chips onto the table with bad marginal decisions. If you're really worried about the first thing, and think you're leaving money on the table with the best hand, then value bet more often, and don't check raise the river. Those are two general mistakes I think a lot of players make. Both a sort of carry-overs from limit, but have a lot of importance in NL. Oh and if you suck out on someone, like by turning two pair when you had middle pair, then take their money.

I think you should focus on marginal decisions and trying not to make bad calls, chase bad draws, etc. Look for parts of your game where you're consistently making bad decisions that cause you to lose more chips, rather than decisions that cause you to gain less chips, because I think you'll find the first one causes you much more money.

There was a post earlier about getting it all in with cash games in coin flip situations. I dont think that's how you should play NL, and if oyu do, then your variance is going to be obnoxiously high (yah, like 1150bb), even if eveyr time you get it in the middle you're a slight favorite. Wait for better spots and get it all in when you're significantly ahead, adn you'll cut down greatly on your variance. It's just not a good idea to make a habit of getting it all in preflop with 66 against AK in a cash game, even if you are a slight favorite. Wait for better spots.

[Rastapopoulos]

[ QUOTE ]
QUIT CALLING ALLINS WITH HANDS THAT ARE SLIGHT FAVORITES OR SLIGHT UNDERDOGS

Sheet man, this ain't the final table of the WSOP

[/ QUOTE ]

Slight underdogs? Well yes, if he got the pot odds for it...

Slight favorites? To call or not to call? I leave this one for someone else to figure out.

Why? Because as you so correctly put it, this is not the final table of WSOP.

[Rastapopoulos]

That's the thing with NL, you can play it in two ways.

1. You really take variance into consideration when making decisions at the table, leaving you with less swings and a more steady winrate, albeit a lower one.

2. You never take variance into consideration, as this has nothing to do with the hand that is currently played. Whenever you got an edge, you take it. Much greater swings, probably a greater winrate as well.

Of course, we are talking LIFETIME here, not 5 years. Sooner or later, the coinflips straighten out. 54% vs 46% pays off.

But I don't hammer down on those who play with variance in their mind, hell, they are probably making much more money right now. As someone correctly put it, the fishies can always be outplayed rather than letting it all depend on the cards to come.

As long as we know that we are talking about two different things.

[-Skeme-]

How often do you figure someone has the correct pot odds to race in a cash game?

[Rastapopoulos]

Oh, I am not so sure but many acclaimed statisticians claim once every 546th hand.

Does that answer your question?

EDIT: I suspect that my sarcasm was a bit out of line here. But come on? How often I figure some one to have the correct odds? Well, the answer to that is the answer to evey NL HE question: "It depends" /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[villafan]

[ QUOTE ]
Not calling an all-in with 99 against A5o (as it was in this case) means that you are giving up a 70/30 run for the money.

[/ QUOTE ]


How can he know he is up against A5? I think this is a bit result oriented thinking.

[Rastapopoulos]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not calling an all-in with 99 against A5o (as it was in this case) means that you are giving up a 70/30 run for the money.

[/ QUOTE ]


How can he know he is up against A5? I think this is a bit result oriented thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, it is a bit result-oriented thinking. I quote what I wrote in the same post you quoted me on:
[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps the A5o villain in this case was a total nutso who just had bluffed away 2/3 of his stack and have a PFR% of 40 and our Hero had seen him pull of some horrible pre-flop all-in bluffs three hands in a row before this one.

Au contrair, perhaps villain only plays 15% of the hands dealt to him and only raise preflop with AA and KK.

In one of the two examples above, calling is cetainly not -EV. Do you see which one?

[/ QUOTE ]

What I mean is this, of course hero should not call ANY all-in raise with 99 pre-flop against ANY opponent, but I personally think he should most certainly be calling SOME all-in raises with 99 pre-flop against SOME opponents during CERTAIN circumstances (like previous reads on villain etc.).

They play is sometimes +EV and sometimes idiotic depending on the reasons he calls the bet. But we can't think that our Hero plays like a fish with the input we have received from him. He needs to give us more input.