minus 581 bets.
 

Since september first i'm down the following amount of bets at party poker. Not including skins. I'm doing well enough on other sites (up over 1100 bets...) but this run at party is just sickening.

-107 at 100/200
-110 at 50/100
-94 at 30/60
-95 at 20/40
-95 at 10/20
I know this equals 500 but from peak til bottom it's 581. Yikes. I rule at poker.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y21...ck/600bets.jpg

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Rigged. It doesn't really help that the 50 and 100 aren't really that good of games that often.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

That is absolutely brutal. I have been playing with you a decent amount and you have been playing well (but you already know that).

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Unfortunately I still have you beat.

[image]http://img432.imageshack.us/img432/1...idetime7ss.jpg[/image]

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Rigged. It doesn't really help that the 50 and 100 aren't really that good of games that often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right and I haven't been playing in them as of late and when i did play it was usually when I fealt it was a good game.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

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

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

i dont think the poker gods care what site you are on.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Why do you think your downswing is so large?

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

They flipped the switch on him, clearly.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]



it's about as much of a downswing as me taking my last 52 weeks and putting my worst 10 together and saying I'm on a 1000 or whatever bet downswing

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

That's really bizarre. I remember many years ago when I first started playing poker at a private club (15/30), I was winning pretty good overall but yet on Saturdays, I was at one point down over 300 bets. My conclusion at the time was that something was happening on Saturday's that affected my winrate at the game. So I stopped playing Sat.

Could your results be due solely to variance? Or is there something else also going on? Maybe your style of play isn't meshing well with Party's games. Maybe a little paranoia is warranted. Maybe someone has slipped a Trojan into your computer that transmits your hole cards? I know there's another thread somewhere here that talks about that, tho I don't know how reliable it is.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]

His play at party is, and not by a trivial ammount.

As we all know, the general texture of a game varies from location to location (live and online.) I was wondering if maybe something about Bike's style of play changed when he started playing really high on other sites and thinks he may not have re-adjusted to the party game.

Or maybe he was just not playing his A game on party, etc...

Or maybe he cashed out recently... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

In any case, I'm sure Bike has thought about the reasons for his downswing at Party, and I was curious what he thinks they may be...

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously. Sorry BK, but you really missed with this post.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

I don't know. If you want you can say I'm not a winning player at those 50/100 and 100/200 games and so those bets are just losing bets not downswing bets, and I'm sure I"m not a big winner in that game, but I got sucked out on so many times in those games it was incredible.

Maybe account a few bets to playing too many tables while talking to people on aim. I never get pissed these days at what's going on so not 'f this' kind of tilt. Maybe a little gunshy but really not even that so bad. And like I said I'm winning on other sites/skins so it's not totally horrible. I have lost 6 of the last 7 days though so that's getting a little sickening.

Just tons and tons of days like today...1k hands 35/42 went/won at showdown stats.

Luckily I don't need the money for anything and my bankroll is super inflated for the limits I'm currently playing and I think that helps me handle it a lot better...but it still makes poker dreadful kinda and just not fun...so it's easier to play civ 4 instead.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
so it's easier to play civ 4 instead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was gonna say that civ 4 doesn't pay as well, but then I compared zero with -580 and actually you'd have been better off playing civ 4 rather than the Party (bots?) [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

have you ever had anything worse than 200+ at anything higher than 5/10 prior to this? Just wondering as your rise in limits was quick to say the least.

losing sucks btw. it messes with your head so friggin much, hang in there man.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Not to belabor an issue that keeps coming up, but to what extent do you think this is a function of the opposition improving rather than just running bad?

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]



it's about as much of a downswing as me taking my last 52 weeks and putting my worst 10 together and saying I'm on a 1000 or whatever bet downswing

[/ QUOTE ]

Josh P ?

Blah

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

I was wondering why you were sitting at my 10/20 table. Or maybe you were sitting at it when I joined. Either way, the table sucked and you should have left it. I left after I noticed this which was right after I dropped a bunch in a set over set hand.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately I still have you beat.

http://img432.imageshack.us/img432/1...idetime7ss.jpg

[/ QUOTE ]

WTF?? Is this graph forged??

If it's not...I'm so, so, so sorry Mr. NLSoldier.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

I wonder if there is something different about Party that is causing you downswing on Party and not other sites. Taking a swag, for instance, if BK always plays 6 or more tables when he is on Party, but often only plays 4 or less when he is on a combination of sites. It seems to me he might have a hard time staying in the "good" Party games if he plays too many tables.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering why you were sitting at my 10/20 table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering why you were sitting at my 10/20 table.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've played 10/20 6max a couple times when at friends on their laptops cause I don't have any software and just feel like relaxing with poker. That's most of it.

Last night all the 30 games sucked really bad and I just fealt in the mood to go dominate some games...so I opened up some 10/20 tables and dropped 85 bets instead lol.

Something with the date.....
 

Man, I know how you feel and its gotta be even worse for you. Oct, has been my worst month ever, even though it was more break even for me. It seems to be suck out month at PP.

Most days this month I have been laughing (with insanity) as I get beat on yet again. I logged 5 winning days this month and SD stats of 38/30 were quite regular.

Amazingly after a huge Saturday night, I am up for the month, BUT I definitely noticed that I was slightly gun shy and lost some bets on rivers since I was so accostom to being beat by the river card. I too am way overbankrolled for that game, but the doubt has to creep in. Eventually you get sick of being raised on an innocuous card on the river and having to call down becasue you think people have to be putting plays on you since they cant suck out every time. It is a difficult cycle to work through.

I take some solace in the fact that I can see the unluckiness in PT. Like winning only 1BB wih AA and KK. Your downswing is however rather large even for variance. I wish I could mention some things to help, except when I was at your table I did not notice you really get out of line at all.

Good luck.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

omg NLSoldier. DeathDonkey told me about this when we were out last night and I nearly cried for you. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why do you think your downswing is so large?

[/ QUOTE ]

is it really a downswing if you are up 700 bets?

[/ QUOTE ]



it's about as much of a downswing as me taking my last 52 weeks and putting my worst 10 together and saying I'm on a 1000 or whatever bet downswing

[/ QUOTE ]

No, it is not the same thing.

To illustrate by example: If someone says he has had very good results, but that he plays a variety of games and he's found that playing omaha he's suffered a downswing of 400 bets, or that at 200/400 he's suffered some big downswings but not at smaller limits, no one would say that because he's winning overall then he should ignore it.

Yes, if you are simply identifying bad days/weeks or whatever and putting these together solely because they're bad, then that is a meaningless stat. But if you group together any number of sessions on any other criteria (it may be by game, limit, day of the week, site, casino, etc) and look at those results, those stats are meaningful and sometimes very revelatory. In fact, you can even, for the sake of analysis, pretend that those are the only games you play and these are the results, ignoring your results in other games.

In fact, failure to correctly identify and interpret such 'local' results can be very costly. After all, we are simply interpreting 'local' results when we say we can't beat the 100/200 game but do fine at 30/60, or that we suck at stud but excel at hold em.

From personal experience: I used to go to the casino and while waiting for my regular game(s) would oftentimes spend time playing smaller non-holdem games like 20/40 stud or 15/30 stud hi/lo. But because I keep good records, I saw that I was losing thousands in those games. i finally figured that I simply don't take those small games seriously enough to beat them, so I no longer play them anymore. But if I had just looked at my overall results, I would not even have noticed the money I was losing at those games and would have continued to leak there unnecessarily.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]


Yes, if you are simply identifying bad days/weeks or whatever and putting these together solely because they're bad, then that is a meaningless stat. But if you group together any number of sessions on any other criteria (it may be by game, limit, day of the week, site, casino, etc) and look at those results, those stats are meaningful and sometimes very revelatory. In fact, you can even, for the sake of analysis, pretend that those are the only games you play and these are the results, ignoring your results in other games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. My overall bb/100 since sept first over the 81k hands i've played is still .93 so really it preobably doesn't mean as much as one would think.

And I have a 400k hand db that would show I'm doing well long term.

I just thought it was kinda a sick run on one site.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

I have also noticed that my Party stats are significantly worse than my stats on other sites. I'm not sure what it is, but it could be do to your style not working well with the type of players at Party as opposed to the type of playes at other sites. Or it could truly just be coincience and just a downswing at Party and an upswing at others. But that's all I can think of.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have no clue.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC, bike has had a -45k day. He doesn't need you telling him about variance, n00b.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for posting about something you know nothing about.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Where do you get those graphs?

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

Dear BK,

You suck at poker.


Love,
Sponger

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Where do you get those graphs?

[/ QUOTE ]

https://sourceforge.net/projects/pokergrapher/ I think.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The things people say on this site astound me. So many people take shots at people they don't know in situations they know nothing about in spots they never would in real life just to make themselves feel better.

Get rid of your [censored] ego.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
you ran so well on the way up I honestly don't think you're fully prepared for real variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

I meantioned what you said to james282 and he laughed and said "you've had more variance than any great player i know."

Somehow I've played 500k hands of mid/high limit games...at least half of them short-handed and somehow I don't know variance? Right.

Re: minus 581 bets.
 

[ QUOTE ]
my bankroll is super inflated for the limits I'm currently

[/ QUOTE ]

pull a mike l, buy a house.