[tinhat]

One of my leaks (don't know the magnitude yet) is overplaying my hand (like top pair) in the face of villain turn c-r HU (I think they're taking shots w/weak hand just because I pfr and no A/K hits the board so I figure they figure all I have is an over). This is in $1/2 6m. So I wrote a perl script to extract villain turn c-r to examine them in-depth.

I happen to have 30k hands from a friend who is a considerable/consistent winner there throughout. We both play party and typically about the same hours during the day/night. And out of curiosity ran the script against his hands as well. The result (over ~16k hands) was that I was c-r 94 times and him, 51 times. Naturally we're both net losers in this situation but my bb/100 is almost 3x worse than his in this situation (I believe mostly because of the overplaying aspect). Safe to say (I think) that in effect I am 4x worse off in this one situation than he is (c-r 2x as much but >= 2x worse loss rate).

So I'm definitely looking at how badly I play in this situation (making my expected losses worse than they need to be), but I'm curious now about me being c-r 2x as much as him. As opposed to something like a subset of starting hands distribution, is a poker situation (like facing turn c-r) subject to variance to the same extent other variance-related poker events are? Or might there be some aspect in his play that (wild guess) *discourages* turn c-r (besides him checking thru)? My guess is that the more aggressive player is likely to get trapped this way and although my friend is 25/15 he's not particularly aggressive postflop. But I really have no idea so am looking for opinions here...

Mike

edit: I have to add that position-wise, I was almost 3x as likely to be playing from blinds as him (in villain c-r hands) so IMM this makes the results even uglier (i.e., I wasn't even in position to be c-r as often as him).