down 40 buyins and climbing

[PorscheNGuns]

Anyone else ever had a streak anything similar to this? 4 sessions into september Ive climbed over down $1000 playing exclusively $25 PLO. Zero tilting, just "variance". The icing on the cake is that in these 4 sessions I have yet to double up at a table even once ($41 is the highest a single stack has gotten)

Uncanny. I think Im gonna need more reload bonii.

-Matt

[yvesaint]

Have you considered the possibility that 40 buy-ins could be something besides variance?

[PorscheNGuns]

Yes, I've assembled 40k hands since April at the 25, 50, and 100 stake PLO tables at Party, and my overall bb/100 was over 20. I wrapped up August up over $2k. My play hasnt changed at all in the first 4 sessions of september, so Im just praying that the 25PLO didnt get 100 fold tougher overnight. Either it did, or this is "variance"

-Matt

[GimmeDaWatch]

Uhhhhh, no I have never experienced anything close to that. wow. Most buyins I've dropped playin those low limit PLO tables is about 7 or so and I won most of it back the same day. So you've had top set lose once you're called postflop like 25 times in a row then?

[joewatch]

I think -40 buyins is more than variance. I would tighten up if I were you.

[Spellmen]

I agree. The biggest spin I have been in was about 10-15 and there was plenty of bad play mixed in there even though I wanted to blame it all on variance.

[Big Dave D]

Porsche,

For a frequent poster, you don't seem to be playing attention /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Nor following my blog.

I threw off 40-50k in 2 months of hell, followed by a zero month. I can't remember exactly how much, but at least 60-80k of pots in that period i was a good favourite.

Variance in PLO is huge.

Bluff and I have popularised, ok, only the two of us mention it, the 30-50-100 rule. That is , 30 buyins for taking a shot, 50 for a degree of stability, 100 to ensure u need never move down.

Having said all that, you probably arent playing that well. Take a break. Don't play for a couple of days.

Also, I think 20BB/100 is fairly unsustainable, at least at levels from 2-4 and up. Winrate is a fairly pointless statistic to get hung up about. It makes the maths geeks happy, of which 2+2 has an inordinate amount, but at best its just an indication. At worst its purely a historical fact. Just focus on good decisions.

gl

dd

[BluffTHIS!]

Notice too regarding the 30-50-100 buyin rule we advocate, that you can adhere to the various levels with less money by always buying in shorter than the max. Thus on a $25 table buying in for only $15 intially, although I would not leave just because my stack grew. I do not do this personally as I think it important to buyin for the max to maximize earnings. But buying in shorter, though not extremely short, can be a way of providing a bigger cushion for a given size bankroll.

And take the advice of Dave and others and take a break and re-evaluate your game on all streets.

[PorscheNGuns]

Ah forgot about that blog, Ill check it out...and havent heard of the rule, but it sounds solid.

I had originally taken saturday and sunday off only to come back monday to crash 12 more buyins, but I suppose another couple days off will be for the best.

I think morning play vs night play may be playing a part here. Throughout the summer 90% of my play at been 7pm-midnight EST, which is generally when the PLO tables were packed with avg pots close to the table buyin. These past few days Ive been uncharacteristically playing from more like 10am to 3pm.

-Matt

[joewatch]

Dave,
Although I believe you regarding the 30-50-100 rule, do you really thing that -40 buy-ins is reasonable variance for the lower limits? I really thing that at the $100 buyin level and below, the overlay for a good player is pretty huge. I myself have never dropped more than 5 buy-ins, and I always buy-in for the max. Just a thought.

[Big Dave D]

I've never played below 1-2, and not below 2-4 in at least 2 years, so my knowledge of those kind of games is almost zero.

One slightly amusing story about this. Back when the 5-10 first kicked off on Stars, we got into this conversation. I said, an absolute minimum was 30. If only /images/graemlins/smile.gif Two guys got into it, saying what the hell did I know, 10 buyins is enough for any winning player, blah blah.

And I never saw them again.

And I am still here, sort of /images/graemlins/smile.gif

gl

Dave

[PorscheNGuns]

The consecutive streak has ended just now, hopefully along with the overall streak. I officially turn a 25 stack into 50 (actually into 70 on one hand).

That was the astonishing thing about the last 5 days. It wasnt only a bad run, it was ice cold. I never once breached $50 at a table while losing 40 buyins worth.

Anyways, two $150 reloads (a "relative's" account) as well as two empire reloads of $100 in the last 5 days kept my head cool.

-Matt

[dibbs]

A newb to the 25 plo so jmo...

I keep close track of how many pots I win/lose where I was the favorite, I don't get pissed off (for the most part) as long as I make positive decisions.

Off the top off my head I'm losing in PLO for september, it may be close, but I'm down probably 10 buy ins where I got it all in on the turn and I was at least a 2 to 1 favorite so it makes me sleep better.

40 seems a little high, I suppose it's possible though, just check HH's to see you're making the right moves in big pots and not bleeding chips with a lot of mediocre starters.

[PorscheNGuns]

I have PTO, is there a way I can look at pots I was involved in over x dollars? Or hands I lost the most in? That would be flippin sweet.

-Matt

[mshalen]

I don't think the time of day is a factor. Lately I have been playing a lot during the day (my office slows down during the summer) and I have been winning about the same during the day as the evening.

[jhall23]

[ QUOTE ]
I have PTO, is there a way I can look at pots I was involved in over x dollars? Or hands I lost the most in? That would be flippin sweet.

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Go to the third tab called "Game Notes". This will show each individual hand in groups of 100 by default. There is a button that says "Get All". Hit that and it will pull all hands in your db. There will be either a $WON or BB won tab somewhere (can't see cause I don't have PTO in front of me). Just hit that (twice to bring loses to the top) and it will sort based on that field and you can easily see your biggest wins and loses.

[PorscheNGuns]

Wow thanks, thats pretty sweet. I'll have to tinker a little with it later because whenever I try to playback any hand it says it cannot find that hand in the database.

-Matt

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow thanks, thats pretty sweet. I'll have to tinker a little with it later because whenever I try to playback any hand it says it cannot find that hand in the database.

-Matt

[/ QUOTE ]

this may have something to do with your import settings.

[GimmeDaWatch]

[ QUOTE ]
Porsche,

For a frequent poster, you don't seem to be playing attention /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Nor following my blog.

I threw off 40-50k in 2 months of hell, followed by a zero month. I can't remember exactly how much, but at least 60-80k of pots in that period i was a good favourite.

Variance in PLO is huge.

Bluff and I have popularised, ok, only the two of us mention it, the 30-50-100 rule. That is , 30 buyins for taking a shot, 50 for a degree of stability, 100 to ensure u need never move down.

Having said all that, you probably arent playing that well. Take a break. Don't play for a couple of days.

Also, I think 20BB/100 is fairly unsustainable, at least at levels from 2-4 and up. Winrate is a fairly pointless statistic to get hung up about. It makes the maths geeks happy, of which 2+2 has an inordinate amount, but at best its just an indication. At worst its purely a historical fact. Just focus on good decisions.

gl

dd

[/ QUOTE ]


Dave, he said he was playing 25, 50, and 100 PLO on Party. I think 20bb/100 is sustainable and your experiences playing higher limits arent that comparable.

[Big Dave D]

I would tend to agree.

What I would stand by is that winrate calculations are very tenous at best and not worth focussing on. The idea that you can play 10-20k hands, divide the number you won by the number of hands and say that is how much you will win in the future is very, very dangerous thinking. Like a lot of maths bandied around in Poker its engagingly simplistic and reassurring, but also doesn't take into account of a lot of the caveats and underpinnings of what you are statistically doing.

gl

Dave d