I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Previously I had argued that 10K hands was a fair demographic to judge one's capabilities. I recant, my 2+2 bretheren. Tonight I played hand number 80K of 30-60, and I have to say that I regret making that statement.

After 80K hands of 30-60, I have a win rate that I can't calculate because I dont have any sort of poker software to come up with a number that microscopic. In fact, I have no poker tracker or anything of the like, which will change upon completion of this post. Eighty thousand hands, and this is not a joke, (to some it will be) I have managed to gain less than one small bet.

Was I running good for the first 10K hands? Perhaps.

Have I been running bad lately? Yes

Has that had a significant impact on my game? Unfortunately, the answer here is yes, too.

Did I really lose $9,000 in the last 16 days and not book a single winning session? Yeah, and even piss poor players dont do that....


So, I stand before you, beaten and war torn, in submission.

I never thought I would say this, but alas pride is the deadly sin in poker, I was wrong.

From hereforth I will listen and take into account, and not dismiss and argue in futility.


I can't believe I've played 80K hands and havent even earned one [censored] [censored] ass small [censored] bet.


I'd like to thank those of you who are able to consistently beat the 30 games and higher who gave me the time of day in your replies.

I'm going back to 15-30....

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...s/shocking.gif

shocking...

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

shocking that i recanted?

or sarcastically shocking results?


save your fingers...both.....

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Just keep posting and working on your game. My first shot at the 30 didn't work out. It's good that you can admit you were wrong, and in the future, if respected posters tell you they are sure of something, they are probably right. Also, dont limp AA from the SB. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

btw, are you saying you won 0.0bb/100 over 80k hands or less than .5bb/100 over 80k hands, or <0.0bb/100 over 80k hands?

Barron

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

I beleive he is saying he is up a little less than $30.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

at least you still ahve your sig. mine no longer works

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

>>After 80K hands of 30-60, I have a win rate that I can't calculate because I dont have any sort of poker software to come up with a number that microscopic. In fact, I have no poker tracker or anything of the like, which will change upon completion of this post. Eighty thousand hands, and this is not a joke, (to some it will be) I have managed to gain less than one small bet.<<

How do you know you played 80K hands if you don't have PokerTracker or any other software?

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

Wow, just wow. I only lurk on mid-high but I have been reading quite a few of your posts. Its not often people make the realization you have. Also, I would suggest you try out the 10/20 6-max games as well as well as read the HUSH forums.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

I only lurk in this forum. But I have to say this is impressive. I cannot think of too many posters, that would be this honest. Very classy post, which in my opinion bodes very well for your future.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I only lurk in this forum. But I have to say this is impressive. I cannot think of too many posters, that would be this honest. Very classy post, which in my opinion bodes very well for your future.

[/ QUOTE ]

did you see the posts where he pigheadedly continued with his theories or opinions in the face of many good players telling him otherwise?

this post is not only not shocking, its expected.

Barron

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I only lurk in this forum. But I have to say this is impressive. I cannot think of too many posters, that would be this honest. Very classy post, which in my opinion bodes very well for your future.

[/ QUOTE ]

did you see the posts where he pigheadedly continued with his theories or opinions in the face of many good players telling him otherwise?

this post is not only not shocking, its expected.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

It also shows a certain amount of character, regardless of your personal opinion of him.

There have been enough times in my life where I have had to "eat crow", where I generally have more respect for people who admit error, especially after a display of pigheadedness.

btw, it is kind of low brow to gloat over someones misery.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
at least you still ahve your sig.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not anymore.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

http://img476.imageshack.us/img476/2628/22love1de.jpg

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I only lurk in this forum. But I have to say this is impressive. I cannot think of too many posters, that would be this honest. Very classy post, which in my opinion bodes very well for your future.

[/ QUOTE ]

did you see the posts where he pigheadedly continued with his theories or opinions in the face of many good players telling him otherwise?

this post is not only not shocking, its expected.

Barron

[/ QUOTE ]

It also shows a certain amount of character, regardless of your personal opinion of him.

There have been enough times in my life where I have had to "eat crow", where I generally have more respect for people who admit error, especially after a display of pigheadedness.

btw, it is kind of low brow to gloat over someones misery.

[/ QUOTE ]

your sentiment is correct. although it does give me admitedly a sense of satisfaction in that i saw this coming.

still low brow but its like some movies i watch that i know are retarded but i enjoy them nonetheless. just....can't....help....myself....

so sorry for the low brow shocking post. im done.

Barron

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]


[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]?

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Hi Tx:

Losing $9,000 in a $30-$60 game doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]


[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]?

[/ QUOTE ]

i am down like 150bb over like 8k at 30/60. i cant say i played optimally tho.

thankfully bc of 10/20 i can break even overall. [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]


[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]?

[/ QUOTE ]

i am down like 150bb over like 8k at 30/60. i cant say i played optimally tho.

thankfully bc of 10/20 i can break even overall. [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


if it makes you feel any better (it shouldn't!!! [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]) i started off 30/60-50/100 with a 170BB downswing (multitabling 3 of 30/60 and 1 of 50/100, like 3K hands) and then more recently 75/150 with a 60BB "downswing" (1 table like 300 hands [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] )

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

You had 16 straight losing sessions and only lost 150 BB? No [censored] way.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd rather be in your shoes. He's much more confident he's not a winner.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

hi it's 700,000 hands you need to really know something fairly definitive.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

"it's 700,000 hands you need to really know something fairly definitive."

Just in case you're serious, consider that if I play 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year, it takes me TEN YEARS to play that many hands. Are you saying that during year number 8 or thereabouts, I still shouldn't look to my results for "something fairly definitive?"

Tommy

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

C'mon Barron

Many folks came here thinking that they knew a lot and would like to argue their point of view, so there is no harm in that. At least his arguments made a little more sense then the other person, who is now on my ignore list.

Tx had an epiphany and has publicly stated so. You should be congratulating him, not beating him up on his old posts.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

well you got The Publisher to respond, that must be worth something [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] and at least you aren't down 580 BB like this fellow . [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

....< one small bet after 80K.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
"it's 700,000 hands you need to really know something fairly definitive."

Just in case you're serious, consider that if I play 40 hours per week for 50 weeks per year, it takes me TEN YEARS to play that many hands. Are you saying that during year number 8 or thereabouts, I still shouldn't look to my results for "something fairly definitive?"

Tommy

[/ QUOTE ]

Mike came up with that number pretty randomly. Many of us "internet guys" think it is probably a bit lower like 300-400K hands. Enjoy the next 4 years and then get back to us.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

[ QUOTE ]
well you got The Publisher to respond, that must be worth something [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] and at least you aren't down 580 BB like this fellow . [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes, it would be awful to be as big a loser as BK [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Mason-

Thanks for taking the time to respond, and i am in agreeance with you that 9K is not an unreasonable amount to lose in 30-60. However, I think that I am not ready to play at that level yet, and I wonder where I would be right now had I not had immediate success in the 30 game. I am going to take about two weeks off from the game and try to go over my weaknesses and strengths and asses <sp> each. I think that there are decisions that are very obvious to a good player that are not obvious to me, yet.


In response to whoever said 16 losing sessions and losing 9K no f'ing way<<< Yes way. And while any losing session is a bad experience, the kind where you play for six ir seven hours and lose 10 BB's are very hard to deal with, because if two or three pots go your way they become winning sessions.


I plan on submerging myself in literature for the next two weeks (i'm considering a month) before I play another hand of poker.




Tex

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
congratulations. i am have played far less hands and am down far more money. please keep your bragging to yourself from now on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

I don't understand this....

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this....

[/ QUOTE ]

it means you arent doing very bad and you will do way worse in the future even if you are the best player in the world.

btw, did you just jump in the 30-60 or did you work your way up? have you played any shorthanded? you might be better served to play at lower stakes and develop your game more before you try to play at the higher level.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

I played 5-20 limit for about one month, then I played 15-30 for 8 months, and i've been playing 30-60 for about three months....

that is the extent of my poker life


The 9K loss isn't devastating. It's the small losses before that coupled with the last 16 days that hit me hard. I kept 9K in PP to play and wiped it smooth out, and then some. I'm sure i'll have larger swings than this in my days, but this isn't about the swings- it's me saying I'm scaling back to 15-30, and vowing to improve my game before I even do that. I played 80K hands and couldnt win a small bet. I dont belong at those limits, not yet.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

I'm not sure about the 700,000 number, but I am sure that you have a much larger edge in your live games than any of us do online. This means you don't need nearly as many as hands to arrive at conclusions about your game.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hand
 

Well you still proved many people (including me?), wrong about one thing:

In turns out you are humble enough to one day become a very good player. Admitting mistakes is a good first step. gl.

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Really, I would think 80,000 hands would be enough of a sample size, that's got to be at least 800 hours of play or equivalent.

I know the fluctuations can be huge, even when your set is snapped off at the river (capped on flop and turn) by a two-outer, but to wait for 700,000 hands would suggest a standard deviation of 50-100 big bets per 100 hands.

Could it be that most limit poker is simply a game of chance?

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

Something you should remember, as it might be helpful, is that a majority of posters on 2+2 couldn't run the 30 game for 80K hands and be, effectively, a break-even player.

So, while you're not up what you were after 10K, there are many many many that would like to be "even" after that long a stretch that I'm sure are down thousands and thousands.

15 ahoy.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

Re: I was wrong, you were right, but that\'s why i joined 2+2, 80K hands...
 

"Could it be that most limit poker is simply a game of chance?"

IIRC, mike l. once claimed that. My feeling is that it's a game of chance in that, over the next few thousand hands, the best player in the world might be a net loser. But there's no way the worst player in the world will be a net winner.

I can tell you whether the core group of players in my limit game will be winners or losers in the next year with a very high degree of accuracy.

Guys, it\'s not about the money or the 9K swing, thats not it at all
 

I dont like losing 9K anyless than the rest of you. But, the point is that I put myself in a situation where defeat was not beyond me and I had a closed minded approach to my game, both of which have now resulted in me taking time off to analyze my play and gain further insight into the game before I go back to the 15-30 tables.


Why i decided to go from 5-10 to 15-30 to 30-60 in a 12 month period.....well i know why, but that's beside the point....it was too fast.....way too fast.....I'll still play higher when i'm in Vegas, because, my record there is good enough to warrant it, however, I am not ready for the 30 on PP.