[Student]

At least examine the possibility that it isn't variance at work here. I don't use PokerTracker for much, since I'm still on the freebie version, but see if you can figure out some factor(s) that have changed in how you play poker now, vs before.

Then too, sometimes attitudes change. It doesn't take much to change a winner into a loser, and vice versa. I've merely scanned Feeney's book ("Inside the Poker Mind"), but if I had time I'd read it. The best thing about it is that it documents how he got started in poker, and traces his trajectory (presumably thru thick and thin) towards ultimate reasonable mastery of poker. Schoonmaker's "The Psychology of Poker" is another good one; both of these books have been highly recommended from time to time in the Book Forum. Both of these books were written under the guidance of Sklansky (acknowledged on the cover of both books), so they are good ones!

My intuition would be to start back into winning playing small. Go to the 50/100 cents game with just one table, for as long as it takes to prove to yourself you're winning, and then dig in with more tables. So what if it takes an extra day to do it in this cautious manner, if the end result is you discover what's going on in your game that requires change? Rome wasn't built in a day, and your reconstruction might not happen in a day, either.

Of course, I'm assuming it's not simple variance that's responsible. Some day I'll have my luck calculator built, and then I'd be able to help you directly concerning variance!

Dave