Help!

[nykenny]

guys, I lost! I must be the fish. Howelse can I lose after 1000 hands? I believe I played bad, although I am too tired to care now. I suspect my loss was due to tiredness from school work, heck maybe from work work. but seriously, it's really inconceivable that I came out -$205 after 2 hours of 8 tabling, is it for real? 1000 hands is like 25 hours live. if i play for 25 hour straight, i'd better be winning at the end, otherwise where is justice? 1000 is the long haul! long term! long run! how can a winning player come out losing after 1000 hands? either i was steaming or i am a loser. but how could this be? how could there be no 3rd choice? maybe i am just tired, but after 1000 hands? i mean, come'on. there must be leaks... i must go find the leaks... in the mean time, i guess i could use a few hours of sleep, HEY, that's it! I only slept for 4 hours yesterday and have been up all day, this must be it! I lack sleep, and played bad. OK, for those of you who read up to this line, thanks for reading. And oh yeah, Playing poker when you are tired hurts your bankroll. Playing multiple table when you are tired is bad. . Where my fishes???? Why are they biting me???? My kung fu is not strong? I must be on drugs... got to sleep. got to go! Good luck and have fun, everyone.

[Mike Haven]

i once asked a renowned mathematician why if i can make 5bb per hour on one table i can only make 3.5bb per hour on each of two tables, expecting some amazing high falooting mathematical theorem to be reeled off

his answer was simple

you must play worse when you play more than one table

[sumdumguy]

I play well enough, and have automated my game to such a level that I could put a computer to shame. It matter not how many tables I play. In fact, I have even tried 8-tabling.

I perform equally well, 1 or 8 tables: -1.75BB/table-hour. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
you must play worse when you play more than one table


[/ QUOTE ]
i doubt i play worse enough to turn from a winner to a loser, unless, i am a loser to begin with /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
I play well enough, and have automated my game to such a level that I could put a computer to shame. It matter not how many tables I play. In fact, I have even tried 8-tabling.

I perform equally well, 1 or 8 tables: -1.75BB/table-hour. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
my win rate: (-$205/$30)/2 = -3.4BB/hr /images/graemlins/frown.gif

[MaxPower]

I hope you are kidding.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]

I hope you are kidding.

[/ QUOTE ]
why would i be kidding? i take losing sessions very very seriously.

Kenny

[MrDannimal]

Well, aside from the idea that 1000 hands or even 25 hours is "long term" (which is what I hope you were kidding about), you seem to have answered your own question. You played poorly over 1000 hands (whatever online time that was), because you were tired and not playing your A game.

Even so, 1000 hands isn't long term. Not even close. Read Gambling Theory and Other Topics and come to realize (with shock) what long term really is.

[daryn]

i was gonna post the same thing.. he must be kidding, or doesn't understand poker

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
i was gonna post the same thing.. he must be kidding, or doesn't understand poker

[/ QUOTE ]
hey! if u gonna say something like that say it to my face! using "he" makes me think that you think that i am not reading this... do you want to play headsup? /images/graemlins/mad.gif

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[daryn]

oh, there you are.. anyways, if you think 20 hours is too long to experience a losing streak you're just mistaken. if you were joking, then you were joking.. but i didn't get the joke.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, aside from the idea that 1000 hands or even 25 hours is "long term" (which is what I hope you were kidding about), you seem to have answered your own question. You played poorly over 1000 hands (whatever online time that was), because you were tired and not playing your A game.

Even so, 1000 hands isn't long term. Not even close. Read Gambling Theory and Other Topics and come to realize (with shock) what long term really is.

[/ QUOTE ]
OK, i get your point very much, and thank you.

part of the reason i posted this is that i am kinda wanting to hear from some of the poker scholars or poker scientists or just poker winners here on this forum that there should be a point where you can say with high confidence (95% or higher): "within every xx hours of poker, i will come out as a winner, for sure."

the assumption is that you are playing a game you can beat.

Kenny

[ratbastard]

nykenny,
I am going to bite here. I will probably regret it when you tell me this is some joke but here goes.. Study statistics and standard deviation. This helped me understand what is and is not a normal swing and what the % probability of a certain swing over x time is. This is what got me to finally stop worrying about the short term.

rb

[Ulysses]

1000 hands is not the long term. It is very much the short term. Your understanding of the chance factor and statistics/probability involved in the game are very flawed, Kenny. For more in detail analysis of this, post your question on the probability forum. I'd simply state the following:

I win "A" per hour over "B" hours w/ "C" std deviation. (the more info you know the better)

Over a "D" hour period, what are the chances I will win? What are the chances I will lose "E"?

If you pose those questions, people like BruceZ can explain w/ facts to back it up exactly how misguided your assumptions are.

I will simply say this. You will have many 1000 hand losing sessions. You will have 10,000 hand losing streaks. In fact, I bet you'll probably have 30,000 hand periods over which you'll break even or lose.

And yes, if your offer was open to all, I'm available to play heads-up.

[turnipmonster]

kenny,
didn't you post some ridiculous win rate here a week ago and then say you probably wouldn't maintain it? certainly if you have a higher than average win rate over many hours, you can expect to have some downswings as well.

B&M pros talk about having losing months sometimes, and that's about 4800 hands. so 1k hands is a about like having a losing 5 days. not something to really worry about. I would start worrying at about 10k hands or so, personally.

--turnipmonster

[astroglide]

here's your response to davidross:

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It has now been over 3 weeks since my last $500 loss. Clearly my more aggressive play is paying off in fewer losing sessions, as well as smaller losses when they occur.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


David,

It is not clearly. a few weeks is not nearly enough evidence for improvement. even you said it yourself that the short-term results can be unfair.

[MrDannimal]

Yes, there are assumptions involved (you're playing a game/limit you can beat), but that's really more the hypothesis you're trying to examine.

Seriously, go get Gambling Theory and Other Topics. I'm reading it right now, and it talks about all of this.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I bet you'll probably have 30,000 hand periods over which you'll break even or lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

how much are you willing to bet? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[ QUOTE ]
And yes, if your offer was open to all, I'm available to play heads-up.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course for you, this is an "offer", but for many, i probably stand a small chance of winning, mind you. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

all jokes aside, thanks for the advice. my understanding (expection) of long/short term results and fluctuation might still be far off /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

Kenny

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I bet you'll probably have 30,000 hand periods over which you'll break even or lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

how much are you willing to bet? /images/graemlins/wink.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

You get about 500 hands/hr I imagine. So, that's 60 hrs. If you play 15 hrs/wk that's one month.

OK, the bet is that you will, playing at that rate for the next 12 months, have a one month period (not necessarily a calendar month) in which you will break even or lose.

Since you are sure these games are +EV for you, what kind of odds will you give me?

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In fact, I bet you'll probably have 30,000 hand periods over which you'll break even or lose.

[/ QUOTE ]

how much are you willing to bet? /images/graemlins/wink.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

You get about 500 hands/hr I imagine. So, that's 60 hrs. If you play 15 hrs/wk that's one month.

OK, the bet is that you will, playing at that rate for the next 12 months, have a one month period (not necessarily a calendar month) in which you will break even or lose.

Since you are sure these games are +EV for you, what kind of odds will you give me?

[/ QUOTE ]
strickly sticking to your definition of a month (60 hours), i will lay you 2:1 odds for a $15 bet /images/graemlins/smile.gif that i won't experience even ONE losing 60 hours in the next 720 hours.

deal?

let the real gambling begin! I hope I win /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Kenny

ps. u still have access to my log ?

[Ulysses]

Make it 5:1 and you have a deal. BTW, I hope u win the bet as well. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Kenrick]

[ QUOTE ]


part of the reason i posted this is that i am kinda wanting to hear from some of the poker scholars or poker scientists or just poker winners here on this forum that there should be a point where you can say with high confidence (95% or higher): "within every xx hours of poker, i will come out as a winner, for sure."

[/ QUOTE ]

400 hours.

Using a B&M 35 hands per hour, 1000 hands is only around 30 hours. 1000 hands is nothing.

[nykenny]

[ QUOTE ]
Make it 5:1 and you have a deal. BTW, I hope u win the bet as well. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]
Ulysses,

i am very flattered by the HIGH confidence you have in me /images/graemlins/laugh.gif. but 5:1 is outside of my confident interval hehehe.

so i decline /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[TJSWAN]

nykenny,

I think you are not factoring in the multi table part. Based on your own statement " 1000 hands is like 25 hours live " then things should be looked at differently.

$205/$30/25hrs = .27BB/hr

or

$205/30/(2x8) [ 16 " actual hours " ] = .43BB/hr

Either way I think your calculations when not factoring in the multi table effect are making your numbers look worse than they are. Hope this helps.

Tim