Is it Possible to be Solid AND Win Big??

[slim]

I play 5/10 only so far. I consider myself to be a solid poker player because I win about 70% of my sessionsand average about 1.7BB/hr overall.

Out of all the times I've played, the most I have ever won in one session is $550. I have accomplished this feat many times, as well as many in the 300-400 range. However, I have never won 7-8 hundred dollars or even 1000 dollars in one session. I notice however, that some of the loose players, and maniacs sometimes win 700-1000 dollars in one session.

My question is this.......is it much more likely that a loose player or maniac can win large amounts of money than a tight solid player? Am I wrong in thinking this? The reason I think this is because, when a loose player has a lucky day, and he plays 50-60% of his hands, he will make tons of money. A solid player however does not play many hands, so even if he is having a lucky day, can only win so much. I find that some days, a lot of the hands that I toss (i.e. 7-5o,9-7o,K2s etc)would have won had I played them, but I don't. A loose player would have played all those hands and on a good day, win most of them.

I am not planning on becoming a loose player but want to know if my thinking is right. Has anyone here ever won 800-1000 in one session of 5/10,4/8,6/12 and considers themselves a tight solid player? How did you do it? Did you keep getting AA, AK all night? Were you playing looser that night for some reason?

[eMarkM]

Sounds about right to me, your variance will be no where near the loose players, good and bad. I've seen a loose player take down 1K in a 10/20 game in half hour on more than one occassion. You may never accomplish that, but then you won't drop a rack in a half hour either, and you see the loosies do that all the time, too.

Ever notice that it's always the loosies that have the kill button? The tight players are rarely in two hands in a row, let alone winning two hands in a row. It's the bad players that are forced to post a kill. It's like a tax on bad play.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

It's possible, but it won't happen very often. I have won 140 BB in a game once, and 130 BB in a game once, and 100 BB in a game a few times. Mostly, I usually win or lose on the order of 30 BB or so, and the large wins / losses are rare. Those times I had huge wins the deck was running over me all night. My generally tight play prevents me from having very many huge winning sessions. Now the maniacs will have these sessions much more often, because they play every hand and raise all the time, but they'll also lose big FAR more often.

[bernie]

"It's like a tax on bad play."

what a great way to describe a good players advantage in a kill game

b

[haakee]

The loose players have higher variance and are more likely to book a big win or a big loss than you as a tight player.

We can do some math to see the likelihood of booking a big win. If you're a tight player you may have a standard devation of about 10 BB/hour. Say your expected win is 1BB/hour. In a 4-hour session, your standard devation is sqrt(4) * 10 BB == 20 BB. That means that 95% of the time you will end up between -36 and +44 big bets per 4 hour session (within 2 standard deviations). Only about 1 out of 1000 sessions will you book a win that is 3 standard deviations above the norm, or +64 BB. However, your standard devation will go up in online games (more hands per hour), loose-aggressive games and short-handed games, so you may see bigger than usual fluctuations in these situations.

Personally, in about B&M 100 sessions that average around 4 hours, I've never had bigger than a 45BB win (although I did have a $180 win in a $2-4 game in only 1.5 hours once).

[Tommy Angelo]

"Out of all the times I've played, the most I have ever won in one session is $550."

Stay longer.

[slim]

Actually, a lot of times, I'll be up $400-$500 in about 3-4 hrs and I do stay longer (about 10hrs) thinking I'll keep winning but it doesn't happen. Usually, I'll lose some of it back and go home only up 100-200.

[Ed Miller]

Actually, a lot of times, I'll be up $400-$500 in about 3-4 hrs and I do stay longer (about 10hrs) thinking I'll keep winning but it doesn't happen. Usually, I'll lose some of it back and go home only up 100-200.

Obviously (if you are a winning player) it is more likely that you will continue to win than that you will lose some back. You probably don't have enough data points.

[Ulysses]

Personally, in about B&M 100 sessions that average around 4 hours, I've never had bigger than a 45BB win (although I did have a $180 win in a $2-4 game in only 1.5 hours once).

If you weren't such a wussy about going back home and getting your beauty rest, you'd be able to win 100BB+ in some of the games I've seen you play in.

My biggest win was 120BB. I believe it happened in an incredibly soft session when the only other decent player at the table went home because he was tired and had to keep his standard deviation within the right bounds. [img]/forums/images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

Seriously, if I'm winning a lot after 4-5 hours, I usually stay for another 2-3 hours unless the players I've been winning from have all gone home. I almost always continue to win during that period. After 8-10 hours or so, I now often leave even if I'm still winning a lot because I'm not as sharp as I'd like to be at that point and I'm rarely still all that psyched about playing poker at that point....

[haakee]

Maybe in hours 0-4 he's a winning player, but in hours 4-N he's not a winning player. If you can only play your A game for 4 hours then go home afterwards. The game will still be there when you come back.