PDA

View Full Version : Always a bridesmaid


ddubois
06-19-2004, 10:21 AM
In my first 56 10/1's, I had 12 firsts, 5 seconds, 8 thirds, for 44%ITM and $294.

In my first 30 20/2's, I've had zero firsts, 8 seconds, 3 thirds, for 37%ITM and negative $60.

I'm going nuts. I just can't seem to get a win, and it's making my stats ugly. I often manage to get people all in with dominated hands, but they river their kicker on me, or make a flush, or whatever.

And I don't know if I have a leak in my heads up play or what. It does appear like the play in teh money is better in the 20/2's, but maybe that's just a perception.

On more than one occassion I felt like I had control over someone who folded too much, stealing their blinds left and right, but then of course, one time too many I try to raise them off their blind with a hand like QTo and they come back at me with an ace and all my hard work is undone, and it's back to coin flips. One thing I've noticed is that when the blinds get up over 300, it sort of feels like you are pot committed with any raise.

Nemesis
06-19-2004, 01:00 PM
I have the same issue... i don't know when to lay down my steals... especially if any of them hit. When we get down to 5 or less players and the blinds are big i start stealing a LOT. People let me... then i'm a HUGE chip leader and lots of people are short stacked and desperate... they push in with dominated hands... i call and lose =/

Tosh
06-19-2004, 01:08 PM
A sample of 30 is statistically insignificant.

HajiShirazu
06-19-2004, 02:45 PM
When the blinds are over 300 at party, you ARE pot committed with any raise.
Clearly you have either been folding too much headsup or getting very unlucky. Even if you got it in pair under your opponents pair at the end every single time, you would still win on average 1 or 2 of those 8. Ax vs two middles isn't even that big of an advantage anyway. Keep raising with any above average showdown hand and taking those blinds and hope to suck out when you're only taking slightly the worst of it, knowing that all those blind steals more than make up for it.

patrick dicaprio
06-19-2004, 02:55 PM
a sample of thirty is the minimum that could be acceptable. but the real question is what are the chances that a player who rates to win more than his fair share can go 0 for 30? it is similar to baseball where it is much more likely that a 200 hitter will go 0 for 20 when compared to a 300 hitter, (i think it is 15 times more likely or so) so that a guy that goes 0 for 20 is less likely to be a 300 hitter than one who doesnt even though 20 may not be statistically significant.

i point this out because i have the same problem as ddubois, tho not to the same extent and it is not clear to me that i should be doing better. and i think about it in the way that i mention above.

Pat

ddubois
06-20-2004, 06:48 AM
Never mind, bad streak smashed. /images/graemlins/smile.gif 1st place 4 times today (in 14 tournaments though). I don't thnk I made any adjustments. I'm stealing blinds slightly more aggresively lately perhaps, but not by much.