Is this normal (to be expected)?

[___1___]

Hey guys,

My last 18,300 hands I'm at (.32) bb/100 at 10/20 (previously at 2.3 over 190k hands w/variance of 15.2 per 100).

I don't know the math (which is why I'm asking) is this normal? How likely is this to occur if my true winrate is ~2bb/100?

Just never had anything like this happen before which is why I'm asking...

___1___

[Victor]

i just had 18k at -2/100. my lat 5 are at +5. fun game.

[___1___]

[ QUOTE ]
i just had 18k at -2/100. my lat 5 are at +5. fun game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh...makes me feel better I suppose /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

___1___

[Lmn55d]

you read sxb's threat about his 650BB downswing at 10/20 , right? He was a 3bb winner after 500k hands. El Diablo also reported a 30k breakeven streak in this game and that was when the game was easier. Also rake increase might contribue a bit. Other winning posters have experienced similar stretches.

But yes, from what I know it is normal.

[beachbum]

Check out http://www.svenskpoker.com/math.php?hands=18300&bb100=2&std100=15.2&ci=95&btn Calc=calculate

Plug in 18,300 hands, 2.0 for a winrate, std dev of 15.2, and a 95% confidence interval.

4.2 BB/100 > winrate > -0.2 BB/100

[Victor]

i think that calculator is somewhat pessimistic....

[SomethingClever]

Yep, I think it's normal.

I went ~140,000 hands at 2+ across various limits, then did 55k at like 0.3

[Danenania]

My first 50k hands of 10/20 6-max starting nearly a year ago I ran at a touch over 3bb/100. Then had a 18k breakeven stretch that made my next 50k abut 1.6bb/100. So my first 100k was about 2.3bb/100. Then had maybe 40k more go steadily at this rate. And currently my last 85k hands I have run at 1.5bb/100 (these hands include a large downswing and a few longish breakeven streaks). For a grand total of almost exactly 2bb/100 over ~ 225k hands.

My game has certainly changed around a lot back and forth in this timespan. I would like to think I've gotten much better but how could I be sure? The results certainly don't say that. Of course there are other factors like game toughness and typical time of day that I get my hours in. Now rake is an added factor. It is honestly pretty annoying to have started out running very hot when I know I was making tons of dumb mistakes then watch my results go gradually downhill as I "improve". But hey what can be done? It's still a ton of money. And the most reliable knowledge I've gained is that above all else, there is a TON of [censored] variance present in this game. Probably more than the vast majority of us will ever experience or can even imagine.

So are your results normal? In my experience they are extremely so and nothing to worry about at all as long as you aren't letting them mess with your play. Keep playing, don't tilt, and don't spend energy where it can't possibly help you. Work on things you can control. Maybe your next 100k will be 3.5bb/100. Who knows? The more I play the more I realize that despite its robust aura and reputation, 100k hands is just a paltry paltry sum. Sure it can give you confidence that you win, but for nailing down a winrate with any semblance of certainty it still just isn't squat.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
The more I play the more I realize that despite its robust aura and reputation, 100k hands is just a paltry paltry sum. Sure it can give you confidence that you win, but for nailing down a winrate with any semblance of certainty it still just isn't squat.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put.

[joker122]

of course it's normal. it's really peculiar that you haven't experienced one of these before since i know you've played several hundred thousands of hands.

[cartman]

I made almost exactly 2 BB/100 4-tabling my first 150K hands of 5/10 then made a couple of significant improvements and won about 2.25 BB/100 the next 50K hands and then broke even for the next 40K, during which time I am quite certain I was playing the best poker that I had ever played. My stats were virtually identical to the previous 50K hands, except for decreased aggression factors on the turn and the river that I am pretty sure were just a result of the fact that I wasn't catching as many cards (they have since returned to normal despite the fact that I have changed nothing about my betting/raising/folding criteria). My game was essentially unchanged, but the results were certainly different.

Have you made any changes that you are aware of?

Thanks,
Cartman

[MrBig30]

[ QUOTE ]

Plug in 18,300 hands, 2.0 for a winrate, std dev of 15.2, and a 95% confidence interval.

4.2 BB/100 > winrate > -0.2 BB/100

[/ QUOTE ]

So if you are to believe this it means you should have one of those every 800,000 hands or so. Probably a bit unlucky then? (or some tilt?) Or your winrate is not really 2.0BB/100 longterm.

On the other hand I had a 30K breakeven bit at 5/10 and still ended up with 2.7BB/100 total after 70K. Crazy game.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't know the math (which is why I'm asking) is this normal? How likely is this to occur if my true winrate is ~2bb/100?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is painfully normal. In fact, much worse than this is quite normal. That said, you might not be a 2 BB winner and it does no good to wonder how likely it is that the variance is within the normal range for a 2 BB winner.

2.3 over 200K hands is very solid. I wouldn't really worry a bit.

Krishan

[kiddo]

If u play 18300 hands and win 0.32BB/100 and got your SD you can be 99% sure your true winrate is between
-2.57 and
+3.32BB/100.

http://www.svenskpoker.com/math.php?hands=18300&bb100=0.32&std100=15.2&ci=99& btnCalc=calculate

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The more I play the more I realize that despite its robust aura and reputation, 100k hands is just a paltry paltry sum. Sure it can give you confidence that you win, but for nailing down a winrate with any semblance of certainty it still just isn't squat.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always learn a lot in 100k hands, and the competition has always changed quite a bit. So IMO there's no way the winrate of the last 100k hands can be used to predict the winrate of the next 100k hands.

Remember poker is hard, and work and study accordingly. Good luck!

[Wynton]

What I wonder about more is the severity of short-term swings.

I ran very well in my first 7,000-8,000 hands at 5/10. (I won't bore you with the details of that run because I know it means nothing.) Over last 3,00-4,000 hands, though, I've had a horrid downswing, losing around 275 bb.

I'm well aware that these total swings are nothing exceptional in the big picture. But losing that amount over a seemingly short number of hands makes me assume that I must be doing something wrong.

I guess I'm wondering the following: notwithstanding that a person can run bad over x numbr of hands, shouldn't particularly steep declines over a relatively short period be cause for concern?

[Nietzsche]

I too wonder about the math of the following:

Last 7.4K hands at 10/20: -3.25BB/100
First 35K hands at 10/20: 3.6BB/100

The downswing is approaching 250BB, I have lost for the last 6 days straight. I never had a downswing above 160BB in over 150K hands at 5/10 and I only had one losing week the last 6 months. Now I am starting to question if I will ever be able to win, even for a day... What a crazy game.

Edit: Well according to Kiddo's calculator this could happen more than 1% of the time.

[MrBig30]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I'm wondering the following: notwithstanding that a person can run bad over x numbr of hands, shouldn't particularly steep declines over a relatively short period be cause for concern?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think losing 275BB is always cause for concern, and a good reason to take a hard look at your game, and maybe get someone else to do it for you, maybe even hire a coach. That said, it is probably normal. Just a good reason to work even harder on your game.

[Subfallen]

Variance has a way of knotting up your insides so bad that the toilet bowl you're vomiting into becomes your entire perspective.

So I want you to step back and remember that you're winning an admirable 2.1 BB/100 over 208k hands---you definitely play quite good and have nothing to worry about.

But simultaneously note that sxb just might be the best 10/20 regular in the world (3BB/100 over 500k), and he's had a 650BB downer.

This too will pass, this too will pass...

[spydog]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey guys,

My last 18,300 hands I'm at (.32) bb/100 at 10/20 (previously at 2.3 over 190k hands w/variance of 15.2 per 100).

I don't know the math (which is why I'm asking) is this normal? How likely is this to occur if my true winrate is ~2bb/100?

Just never had anything like this happen before which is why I'm asking...

___1___

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but didn't you once post that you won for 21 consecutive days and never had a downswing more than 150BBs? Maybe it wasn't you, but whomever it was couldn't believe that big downswings happened to so many people.

[arkady]

July 10/20 numbers.

17.5k hands at (3.02)bb/100. -9k.

Then as soon as July ended:

http://www.computerecycle.com/images/poker/PtStatsRKD2.jpg

[spydog]

Your VPIP over that time is like 27% and your W$SF is like 49%. That's insane. I'm surprised you haven't won twice as much. Nice going, though.

[Surfbullet]

You must be a serious pounder to have a 48-50% W$WSF and only 33% WTSD. How do you pull that off?

Surf

[ggbman]

[ QUOTE ]
Your VPIP over that time is like 27% and your W$SF is like 49%. That's insane. I'm surprised you haven't won twice as much. Nice going, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look at his [censored] winrate! Its really just because he hasn't gotten in tons of hands.

[arkady]

I am not sure how those two numbers are linked....why would I need to win 2x as much? Anyone care to elaborate how VPIP and W$SF can be linked to determine a win rate?

Like G said, this is over a small sample of hands - I just wanted to point out that after 17k hands of 10/20 I lost a ton and after 20k hands I won a lot. Mostly to illustrate (again) what variance can look like.

[arkady]

I have known for a while that my style is somewhat different. My showdown numbers were always different from everyone else and I can't really explain it. I can't say I pound them into submission, I really don't...not quite sure how that works out.

[Surfbullet]

Interesting. It's awesome that there are so many ways to win at this game. GL ark!

Surf

[MikeNaked]

[ QUOTE ]
Variance has a way of knotting up your insides so bad that the toilet bowl you're vomiting into becomes your entire perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brilliant metaphor!

[JohnnyHumongous]

I lost 3K in 24 hours this weekend at 10-20, yet I felt I was playing some of the best poker of my life. Go figure. I just tell myself, thank god I didn't begin my 10-20 career with a 150BB downswing or I probably would have never played online poker again.

Or maybe that would have been a good thing...? /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[arkady]

Yes, thats why I always frowned upon PT numbers - they have their merits, but people play differently depending on their personality /images/graemlins/smile.gif Anyway, lets not hijack this any further, bottom line - the variance can shake even the most solid of players.

[sxb]

Well, from 7/7/2005 to 7/18/2005, I ran at -2.94BB/100 over 18,437 hands. Since 7/30/2005, I run hot again /images/graemlins/smile.gif For 34,387 hand, my WR is 3.41. So, I guess it's normal.

[7ontheline]

[ QUOTE ]
thank god I didn't begin my 10-20 career with a 150BB downswing. . .

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you saying? That you're better than me? Thanks for making me feel bad, jerk! Like the $3k wasn't enough to feel bad about. . . *sniff*