First 500 Block of $50 STTs

[XChamp]

There are all played on Party.

1st 100- 0.9% ROI

2nd 100- 28.2% ROI

3rd 100- 12.7% ROI

4th 100- 26.4% ROI

5th 100- -20.0% ROI (yes that is NEGATIVE)

avg ROI- 9.6%


ITM- 37.8%

1st- 10.0%
2nd- 15.0%
3rd- 12.8%
4th- 13.2%


All of this is 3-4 tabling.



Everything was going fine until the last 100. I feel like I got kicked in the balls. Anyone have a streak of 100 like this?


I am very, very frustrated at my ratio of 1sts and 2nds. It was even worse the first 250 or so. I don't see how I can possibly be playing this poorly headsup. I am very aggressive when it gets 1-1 which is why I cannot see why the difference is so much.

I am also very aggressive on the bubble. I looked at 30 or so times I got headsup and my avg stack was 4300, so that does not account for the huge difference between my first and second place finishes.


Thank God for rakeback. At least with that included I am 95% confident that I am a winning player.

[Benholio]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone have a streak of 100 like this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep. I have (and many others I'm sure) lost 20 buy-ins out of 100 before, maybe more than once.

[ QUOTE ]
looked at 30 or so times I got headsup

[/ QUOTE ]

30 times that you are virtually flipping a coin, don't read too much into the results.

[raptor517]

looks good so far. and yes, that negative run, don fret. -20% isnt so bad over only 100. ive had worse. trust me. dropping 40 buyins sucks, but you will see it every 1k block or so. maybe even less. like every 750 maybe. even if u maintain a 10% return.

as far as the heads up 1st to 2nd ratio, your sample is way too small to be worried about that. if it stays the same over 5k sngs, then you might have cause for alarm. a LOT of winning players share a similar 1st to 2nd ration. nothing ot be too worried about. holla

[Blarg]

Heheh. I wish rakeback mattered at the $11 level.

I agree with Benholio. Having some rough, swingy results doesn't seem very unusual to me for a SNG player. SNG's seem to require enormous aplomb. As he points out, so much of this comes down to winning coin flips, and look how small your sample of coinflips actually is. It's almost impossible not to have regular weird bursts up and down in such a small sample size, because anything even a little out of the ordinary looms so big as to make the whole mess seem chaotic. Winning or losing just 10 or 20% more of your critical coinflips can turn your numbers upside down and make you look either like a great player or a lousy one. It's only over time that results even out to adequately reflect your skill level. A long time, for SNG's.

My situation over the last couple of days shows that, too. Yesterday I lost the equivalent of ten buy-ins, and today I won 20, even though I played only 2/3's as many SNG's. I was over 65% ITM and had a ROI of 189%. I felt crummy about it yesterday and like an idiot; that helped keep things in perspective today. Over the two days together, my results were actually unremarkable.

You do mention you 4-table. If you do them in sets, perhaps staggering them would work better, so you don't have to make critical decisions on 4 tables at the same time?

This is your first 500 block of 55's, you say. So you started 4-tabling right off the bat, before proving yourself a winner at that level. I wonder if you couldn't get better results by say doing two or three tables until you feel really solid in your 55 game. I'm saying that as someone who can easily 8-table limit ring games. I still notice that my concentration is a little sharper when I cut back tables. Jumping up to a new limit and immediately four-tabling doesn't seem to me to be the best way to be absolutely sure you're both on top of your game and maybe even learning a little bit and improving. Maybe at least a few days of playing only a couple of tables or something could get your confidence back and give you a chance to prove to yourself that you're as sharp as you want to be. You can't play well without confidence, that's for sure.

[XChamp]

Thanks for your post.

As to why I ostensibly jumped into 4-tabling $50 sit&goes:

I have played a great deal of poker the past 2 years. Most of which was NL$100 6max. I 4-tabled that for about 200,000 hands. I also played a lot of $10 through $100 sit&goes and a bunch of MTTs of varying buy-ins.

I started playing the $50 sit&goes when Party switched their NL blind structure. I did this because:

1- Now that there are deeper stacks, I cannot multitable as well because I need to concentrate more. Things are less automatic.

2- They refuse to have unlimited $200 tables, making table selection very frustrating.

So, given that, I started to play the $50 sit&goes because I plan on playing poker for a living for at least a little while (6 months at the minimum) and I want to concentrate on a form of poker that will: be around for sometime, will offer the ability to make $50+/hr, and has a relatively low variance associated with winrate. 4-tabling $50 sit&goes satisifes these requirements.

I started 4-tabling right away because I knew I had the ability to 4-table and I knew that I could beat the $50s SnGs.

Right now, my results show that I am beating them, just not as severely as I wanted. I have learned a lot the past 500 sit and goes, so hopefully the next 500 I can show a marked improvement.

[XChamp]

Any other comments?

I'm gonna start my 2nd block some time tonight. Hopefully I bounce back.

[TheUsher]

Everything looks fine, might want to tone up the aggression though since it seems you might not be stealing enough. I know lots of people say they're already aggressive, but you might need some fresh eyes to really see if you're pushing when you should.

Also, who's this friend you always mention about that's killing the 55's yet doesn't post here? I'd love to know his and your sn's on Party so we could avoid each other. /images/graemlins/wink.gif Also, I might be able to tell you if we played together to give you an outside opinion on how you play. PM if you want.

[XChamp]

[ QUOTE ]
Everything looks fine, might want to tone up the aggression though since it seems you might not be stealing enough. I know lots of people say they're already aggressive, but you might need some fresh eyes to really see if you're pushing when you should.

Also, who's this friend you always mention about that's killing the 55's yet doesn't post here? I'd love to know his and your sn's on Party so we could avoid each other. /images/graemlins/wink.gif Also, I might be able to tell you if we played together to give you an outside opinion on how you play. PM if you want.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just PM'd you.

I'm actually starting to think I should tone the aggression down. The first 150 or so I was too passive, then I jacked up the aggression and did really well.

Now I think I am being called too much because of previous hands. For example, I think in some bubble situations all the players are willing to call me with A2+, 22+, KT+ but they are not willing to call each other with that loose range.

This generally happens when I have made multiple all-ins to steal blinds. Suddenly everyone is willing to call me down but not each other, which is a terrible disadvantage for me. Perhaps I should start raising almost all-in to make me look less wreckless.

Or maybe it's just in me head.

I have been fiddling around with eastbay's tool and trying to implement it's results. I think it is helping. I need to learn to value connectors and suited cards more when it comes to pushing. Q2 is as good or even worse than 87s

[Blarg]

This happens to me sometimes. I've found a good way to keep stealing is to vary your bet sizes. If you're pushing with trash or they just suspect you are, then suddenly betting out smaller amounts stinks of an attempted trap. Thus you can sometimes bet less to have an even greater chance of inducing a fold.