Thoughts on seeking your own level

[dfscott]

I think it's interesting that the majority of the responses to this post have focused on the BR issue. While they provide guidelines, I don't think my post made it clear what I was getting really getting at. I wanted to try to rephrase with an analogy, but it's difficult because it's hard to find another endeavor that has such an element of luck involved.

My point is that BR is the insurance that you don't have the "right stuff." Most people consider it as insurance against running badly, but I think it's also insurance against unknowingly (or knowingly) being in a game that's beyond your skills.

So I'm really going beyond the question of "how much BR is enough." It's really more of a "how do you know if you're good enough." I think the answer is unknowable for most people -- experts can probably tell when they're in over their heads, but as Al says in PoP, gambling is based on denial, and I think most 2+2'ers, while defintely being more aware of this, are just as susecptable as anyone.

[Blarg]

Sounds like your recent dry run is giving you doubts. That's a healthy thing, because whether you deserve to be doubtful of your game or not, examining your game and being determined to find your weakenesses is a good thing. Even if you are staying at the same level, old weaknesses can rear their ugly heads sometimes, so constant vigilance and examination are always wise.

I do think that very few players really understand how long the long term is, and that that phenomenon is even worse with SNG's, because you get so few identical situations per SNG. Out of a hundred SNG's, you might get heads up only 30 times or less, and that's when you're on a heater. The least variation in luck or more or less skillful play can make a huge difference in your profitability ITM or on the bubble.

So while I don't know that most people don't have the patience to play a lot of SNG's before moving up, as you assert, I suspect that might be the case. And I suspect that because of that, as you assert, most people are making judgments on their play substantially influenced if not totally controlled by short term variation.

I'll use myself for an example. I started playing last month, and now have about 600 games played at the 10+1's on Party. In that time, the figures for those 600 games reflect going from totally clueless beginner to slghtly less clueless to actually not too bad when ITM, and from horrible on the bubble to, well, definitely much less horrible. From big loser, to a big enough winner to earn it all back and becoming a moderate winner overall, to a lousy two week negative streak to recovery back a moderate winner who's still hurting a bit from having an unproductive two weeks.

There's virtually no point in my 600 games that I feel is very reflective of my real game --- absolute beginner who is terrible, then great, then small loser, then small winner -- and even the total together is a pretty rough mess it wouldn't be realistic to draw many conclusions from. As far as really saying what kind of player I am likely to be on a sustainable basis is, this 600 is practically a write off.

And that's 600 games at one level! Almost meaningless. And because it started with my being an absolute beginner, that will influence what kind of average numbers I'll get when I mix in my next 600 or so. And really, any particularly outstanding hot or cold streaks will just further muddy the waters.

It seems clear to me how long term the long term in poker really is. If I were to decide to move up based solidly on my numbers, it would take quite a while to decide I even had solid numbers - even a couple thousand would be just a shot at a more stable idea of where I really stand, but not all that accurate.

I think most people probably decide to move up based on either misinterpreting the significance of their numbers, based on feeling that they're good enough to move up just because of their understanding of the game and level, a combination of the two, or based on their just having enough bankroll to play at a level more exciting for them whether they have the skill or not.

The number of people who really stay at lower levels long enough to accumulate numbers that reliably back up their decision to move or stay is probably pretty small. The number of players who aren't outright big losers whose numbers tell them anything definitive about what levels they should be playing at might be pretty small.

[dfscott]

Blarg, you're solidly on-point here. I definitely am become reflective based on my own results of late, which while I feel are greatly due to variance, are still dismal.

You also helped me zero in on another point that maybe you were making already. There are (at least) two ways to move up:

1) Play enough games to be confident that you're a winner at your level. Then, when you move up, you can view your results in that light. If you double your win rate, you can be pretty sure that it's variance, and if you drop a ton, you can be somewhat certain that it's probably due to variance since you don't expect massive changes between levels.

2) Move up whenever you get the BR, and be prepared for the smackdown, since you never know how much your rising BR is due to positive variance.

FWIW, I tend to use option 2, since I'm a firm believer in the idea that time is money. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Newt_Buggs]

[ QUOTE ]
This is just me so take it for what you will...

I play WAY within my bankroll. I view stt as recreation. My friends needle me about moving up but why? Over the past two years I've cashout for a nice vacation with my wife...Vail is awsome. Along with many weekend golf trips.

I play the 11's. I know, I know that I may be very stupid or nieve about the skill required for higher buy-ins but I'm very comfortable at my current stakes.

My on-line bankroll is my bankroll. I never want to reload. This has has worked for me for the past 19 months. Don't get me wrong I've set goals for myself such as "When I reach x buy-ins for the 22's I'll move." When I reach x it never fails that I continue playing where I feel comfortable...I'm a pussy. But, I take pride looking at my cashier page knowing that I won't go broke and I still put some in my pocket.

I set goals to move but I'll probably always be stuck in the 11's. My slippers are comfy. Call me risk adverse aka pussy.

pbr

[/ QUOTE ]
Many people invest their money in CDs when they could get 3x the expected return in the stock market because they're extreemly risk adverse. I don't think sticking at the 10s is any different from this, nor anything to be ashamed of.

on a different note, sometimes it gets hard to assess whether you are beating a level or not by the terrible plays that you see at every table. Even the $200s have their fair share of fish that somehow stumble into them. Its easy to move up limits and think "wow, he just called an all in on level 1 with A9, I can easily beat these guys" without realizing that being better than the obviously worse person at the table is not nearly enough to beat the rest of hte players and the rake. I know this from personal experience because I have tendency to measure myself against the worst players at the table, something that I'm trying to fix.

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
Blarg, you're solidly on-point here. I definitely am become reflective based on my own results of late, which while I feel are greatly due to variance, are still dismal.

You also helped me zero in on another point that maybe you were making already. There are (at least) two ways to move up:

1) Play enough games to be confident that you're a winner at your level. Then, when you move up, you can view your results in that light. If you double your win rate, you can be pretty sure that it's variance, and if you drop a ton, you can be somewhat certain that it's probably due to variance since you don't expect massive changes between levels.

2) Move up whenever you get the BR, and be prepared for the smackdown, since you never know how much your rising BR is due to positive variance.

FWIW, I tend to use option 2, since I'm a firm believer in the idea that time is money. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

There's a third way to move up, too, and it can probably do a lot to confirm your real ability and fitness for the next level.

That's by adding more tables. For instance, I play 4 tables now. As someone who used to 8-table limit games, it's not much of a strain for me at all. But 8-tabling SNG's is a huge strain. I'm not good enough and quick enough in my decisions to do it comfortably.

If I feel it's time to give myself a greater challenge or make more money, I can do so without changing levels by trying to play 6 or 8 tables(I've tried 6, and don't like it much, but it's doable). I do feel that if I can't do 8 tables for a reasonable ROI at the 11's where I am now, I'm probably not ready to 4- table the 22's. If I can move up to 8-tables with good success over a good period of time, I'm probably going to find four tables of 22 pretty manageable(especially since I usually start a new level on only two tables, or by mixing one or two in with my regular tables).

Doing that successfully will increase my dollars per hour and probably risk less than jumping up a level. That's combining positive with positive for a big win. Playing more games, unless you're quite a bit worse at it than playing fewer, tends to decrease variance, too, which is good for the bankroll overall.

My eventual poker dream is to do things raptor-style -- at least 8 tables at once and at much higher levels. I could see being very happy playing a lot of 50's instead of a few 100's or 215's. So getting 8-tabling SNG's down is a goal just as real as increasing my ROI or moving up. I think I'd put those goals in order of: 1) increasing ROI, 2) learning to play 8 tables without a big ROI drop, and 3) moving up limits.

I think learning to multitable more tables at a particular level can do just as much for both your income and overall poker progress sometimes, but probably not always. Multitabling can also stunt your growth if you let it. But a lot of that really depends on how much effort you put into analyzing your game. For me, at present, either moving up stakes or learning to play more tables would facilitate my growth, and multi-tabling would probably do it cheaper.

All that said, I'll probably do a mix of the two.

[the shadow]

What's your goal?

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Perfection -- be the best you can à la Bozeman?

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Profession -- make a living à la Dali?

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Recreation -- have some fun and hopefully make some bucks à la Scuba?

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Action -- get some action, hopefully make even more bucks, and try not to lose it all at pai gow à la raptor?

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Recreation -- have some fun and hopefully make some bucks à la Scuba?

[/ QUOTE ]

My impression from many of Scuba's posts is that he's not really in it solely for recreation....

I'd rather nominate Phil Van Sexton for this [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]. I think of his poker playing in exactly this sense.

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

Also, I'm not sure I'd put Dali as the best 'professional' example as he admitedly doesn't rely on poker as his family's sole source of income (at least last time the matter came up). I'd put Lorinda or Lacky in this spot (who also is a perfectionist a la Bozeman) - they are consummate pros who seem to check a bit of the Dali-gamble at the door.

So, how about:
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] Bozeman the perfectionist
[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Lacky the professional
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Phil the recreationalist
[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Raptor the completely insane actionist

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

Yugoslav

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Lacky the professional

[/ QUOTE ]
this is dead on. lacky would 12 table the 1-2 limit cash games if he thought he could make more money than in 15-30. which i guess makes sense and all.. but u wont ever see him playing the 100-200 on stars to 'take a shot'. he is very, very smart about his poker, and it works out quite well for him.

[ QUOTE ]
Raptor the completely insane actionist

[/ QUOTE ]
SHIP IT MMMMMMBATCHES. ok, foreal though, i dont have a problem. i just NEED to gambool. its not an issue, i dont need to call GA, set up a session, talk about me destroying my life, blah blah. i just wanna roll the dice. ok? i just wanna WIN by putting myself in situations that are clearly not +ev. whats so bad about that? at least i understand the math behind why i cant ever make money in games other than poker.. holla

[lacky]

nice complaments, but the timing is funny. I'm droping like a rock in everything this month.

I'm down $1150 in sng's, $1800 in 5/10-10/20 limit. I'd play anything at this point if I knew I was gonna win. The worst part about downturns is they can go on for so long you start to wonder what your doing wrong no matter how long you've been doing it. Fortunatly with rackback from last month and a belated pokernow febuary payment I'm just about even for the month. Usually things turn around and I end up having an average or so month. So, I'm still an optimist, as anyone doing this for a living has to be.

On a more positive note, my wife had our baby last week. She only likes to sleep on my chest at night, so we play alot of poker together. Doesn't affect the play any, but typing is hell.

As far as finding a level goes, once your game is solid it's really just a matter of how much losing you want to put up with. If you can beat the $109's, you can beat everything below it as well. Each step down you make a little less, but you have less lossing days also. Sometimes (like now!) I wonder if I wouldn't be happier just 12 tabling .5/1 or $11's. You could still make ok money and you could count the losing days in a month on one hand. Sounds nice! Unfortunately playing those games with a $10k plus bankroll just seems rediculous.

The more I type, the more I realize I'm tired and rambling.

Steve

[raptor517]

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't affect the play any, but typing is hell.

[/ QUOTE ]

we all see that lacky.. you need to go back to 4th grade. (yes yes, i see the jokes coming now about me being there like 4 years ago, so shove it). don worry lack, if anyone knows about variance its you and me. keep grindin out that rent money an ill keep taking shots. eventually ill have money. youll see. holla