Help ! Negative fluctuations or bad play?

[MarlinHooker]

I've only been playing since June (PP, .50/1) and my records show better than average results during my first 50 hrs of play ($3.25/hr win rate). My last 28 hrs are somewhat different. I've lost $153 and won $77. Out of 21 sessions of various time lengths I've lost 12 included 8 in a row at one point. Since I'm new I've been trying to play a tight/aggressive style with only premium starting hands as suggested but I seem to be losing more than my fair share of premium starting hands. I try to bet and raise my premium starting hands but usually I just seem to get called down and lose K-K to J-8o when a 3rd J appears on the river. Am I making mistakes or is it just a bad run? My confidence is starting to be shaken a little.

[Mike]

I have found for myself that sometimes my playing style loosens up after so many wins such as yours, or that it just was not my day to win.

Because your playing time hasn't been that long, and your experience isn't that varied, it may also be the 'game' has changed a little bit in your more recent games, and you haven't made the proper adjustments which may also be small.

It could also be you incorporated some new playing style into your game, and although it appears to be sound, it causes a higher deviation than you are aware of.

I usually crank up TTH and I find out fairly soon what's going on. I know how I pay against TTH, so I use that as a reference point. Good luck, hope you find the cause.

[Nate tha' Great]

In order of increasing likelihood:

5. You're sticking with the premium hands too stubbornly when they don't flop well.
4. You've become too predictable, and could stand to vary your play a little bit.
3,2 and 1. You're playing fine, learning the game, and twenty-eight hours aren't long enough to be much concerned about.

[NotReady]

The last thing you want to do is change your game based on 78 hours of play. Or 100. Or 300. After 500, think about it. After 1000, think hard.

You may need to change your game based on theory, but not results when your sample size is irrelevant.

[gonores]

[ QUOTE ]
4. You've become too predictable, and could stand to vary your play a little bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

No need for this at .5/1. Develop an A game and don't waver from it.

#5 is a very good point.

Doug

[Gabe]

[ QUOTE ]
4. You've become too predictable, and could stand to vary your play a little bit.


[/ QUOTE ]
At this limit, I totally disagree. If fact, to do so would be a mistake.

[Lunamondo]

I started my poker playing at Paradise (and Planet) at the end of the year 2000, at 0.5-1, and won 3.6 big bets per hour playing one table, for 200 hours, winning most sessions and some more. After that I got my losing streak and lost two big bets per hour for the next 100 hours, losing most sessions and some more.

The 100 hours losing streak is normal; it happens every now and then, though it as well can be break even, while the 200 hour losing streak is rare, though one might be break even after 200 hours, but one's results are basically reliable after 200 hours of play; it's just that 100 hours (60 hands per hour) is still under normal fluctuations.

50 big bets is under normal session fluctuations, and the way to deal with those session fluctuations is to put in 100-200 hours and see the results, and foget the session fluctuations.

[trillig]

Try this:

Pick 2 cards... 8/5 combo is a good choice.

Without fail anytime you get them suited or unsuited, play them as if you have AA... raise PF, raise flop unless stinky for AA (rarely) and same for rest...
[choosing AA is not fair lol)

This will have you mixing up play with good amount of randomness.... and surprize! You will most likely (disclaimer) take down some extra pots as a result, one way or another.

-t

[lostinthought]

When I first started playing at Party, I did something similiar to this and had a good time. My fav. hand was 5-10. esp if it was suited. Occasionally the flop would hit me hard (10-5-10) and nobody believed I had anything and would pay me off. Also, when I would lose and show cards, either by being called on last bet, or showing by choice, people thought I was stupid, and would pay me off when I really did have something.. (e.g. AA, KK, or a set)
As much fun as this was (esp. when cracking good hands with it), looking back, it's hard to tell if this kind of play made me money or lost me money. My suggestion is if you are going to vary your play (although I don't think it's necessary at the .5-1 limit), I would do it with hands that have more potential, but still may (normally) incorrect to play a certain way. Examples may be raising with med. suited connectors in middle position, rather than limping, or raising with Ax on the button when there aren't many callers. Most of the times, if the flop hits you in any way, and you are first to bet, or raise almost all will fold. Of course, a lot of this depends on table conditions, and your image, and has to be at higher limits where people may pay more attention.
In short, my point was in response to trillig - perhaps varying play with cards that have more potential rather than trash might be more effective.

Cheers.

[pudley4]

If you've only been playing for 78 hours at the .50-1.00 level, anyone who tells you to "vary your play" is giving you very bad advice

78 hours is just a hiccup when compared to the long term.

To get a more accurate picture of your true ability you could either: Play 1000 hours and see what your results are; or post some hands on the small-stakes forum and get feedback on how you played.