|
|
#21
10-31-2005, 01:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
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.
|
|
#23
10-31-2005, 01:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#25
10-31-2005, 03:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#26
10-31-2005, 03:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#28
10-31-2005, 03:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#29
10-31-2005, 03:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
|
#30
10-31-2005, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
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.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
