Long streak with no playable hands?

[yellowjack]

At one point I had flopped sets with 4 out of 5 of my pockets last night. I guess I have you to thank for that.

Anyhow I played these as aggressively as I was playing them because even though opponents were seeing the trend, I just did the usual thing.

So with opponents seeing the trend, they are going to call you down if you raise PF a lot of the time.

Anecdote aside, maximize wins when you're "running good", minimize them when you're not getting any playable hands and your drawing hands aren't hitting anything on the flop. [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]

[TomBrooks]

Although many, relying on logic and statistics, believe there is no reason to leave an otherwise good table if you are not getting good cards, I have found in playing about 20,000 hands that the great majority of the time, one can do better by switching tables than staying at one where you are not getting good cards or you are getting sucked out a lot. Preliminary indications of my hands-on intuitive research, while not conclusive, so far indicate that even going to a tighter table is better than staying at the one that you are not getting good cards at.

-TomBk

[dangerous_badman]

[ QUOTE ]
Although many, relying on logic and statistics

[/ QUOTE ]

Fools that we are..


[ QUOTE ]
one can do better by switching tables than staying at one where you are not getting good cards or you are getting sucked out a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this deadpan sarcasm? A table I'm getting sucked out on a lot at is one I want to stay at, as opponents must be continually drawing thin against me for this to occur.


[ QUOTE ]
going to a tighter table is better than staying at the one that you are not getting good cards at.

[/ QUOTE ]

How? Taking the view that "I am not getting good cards at this table, therefore I will change tables" is silly. The random number generator doesn't care which table you're sitting at.

[JKetzer]

Switching tables probably helps stop tilt somewhat, and it doesn't cost anything except the chance to play against that particular batch of opponents. It can't really hurt, unless you're at a particularly amazing table.

If you're feeling affected enough that you have to switch tables to avoid tilt, it's most likely better to just stop playing poker for at least a few hours...

[Yosemite Mark]

[ QUOTE ]
...I have found in playing about 20,000 hands that the great majority of the time, one can do better by switching tables than staying at one where you are not getting good cards or you are getting sucked out a lot....

-TomBk

[/ QUOTE ]

What you are seeing here is 'regression to the mean'... If you have an especially bad run of 100 hands, the odds are your next 100 hands will be better. This is not because the cards have a memory, it is because the especailly bad run is an unlikely event with a low probability of repeating. This would happen if you stay at the same table or switch tables.

[TomBrooks]

Hi Yosemite,

You're obviously one of those guys that believe in logic and statistics. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[colpres]

I was in California last week so wanted to get in some "live" play. Went to the Commerce and made my first BB at 3-$6 hold'em at 10:00 pm. The game was great and the players were terrible, but I won my 1st pot at 1:30 a.m. Won 3 or 4 pots after that, went home at 4:15 am down $61

Thinking 3.5 hours of nothing but folds set the stage for a comeback, went to the Bicycle next evening, posted BB in $3-6 at 9:00 pm, and won my first pot 3 hours 45 minutes later. Not counting bb's, probably entered 10 hands, only got to the river about 4 times in the first 4 hours. Went home at 4:00 am -$144.

Including all my outings over 3 days (17.5 hours at the tables), had pocket K's once, beaten at show-down by pocket A's : Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], make set on flop and fold on river to a bet and a blank Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] board, : and lost with pocket jacks when board went rag [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and winner has 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. No other pocket pairs higher than 99, not bad beats, just the blinds and absolutely no hands winnable after the flop.

I tried to console myself by saying "at least I held to my standards" but it seems when you have such lousy results you had to do something that caused them. My neighbor at the table at the Bicycle liked to let me see the cards he was playing after I folded, and I watched him go from $150 to $600 over a 1.5 hour period, playing Q-2s, 10-9o, A-3o, J-6s, etc, when he racked them up and headed home. Note he didn't win by aggressive or tricky play - he WON $450 by playing Q-5 offsuit and those other "great" starting hands. If it had been on-line, I would have charged that the site was rigged.

[Beavis68]

It is amazing looking at my PT stats how many loose and semi-loose (and the high side of semi-loose) passive players profit like this for a few hundred hands.


[ QUOTE ]
I was in California last week so wanted to get in some "live" play. Went to the Commerce and made my first BB at 3-$6 hold'em at 10:00 pm. The game was great and the players were terrible, but I won my 1st pot at 1:30 a.m. Won 3 or 4 pots after that, went home at 4:15 am down $61

Thinking 3.5 hours of nothing but folds set the stage for a comeback, went to the Bicycle next evening, posted BB in $3-6 at 9:00 pm, and won my first pot 3 hours 45 minutes later. Not counting bb's, probably entered 10 hands, only got to the river about 4 times in the first 4 hours. Went home at 4:00 am -$144.

Including all my outings over 3 days (17.5 hours at the tables), had pocket K's once, beaten at show-down by pocket A's : Q [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]Q [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], make set on flop and fold on river to a bet and a blank Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] board, : and lost with pocket jacks when board went rag [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] and winner has 7 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]6 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]. No other pocket pairs higher than 99, not bad beats, just the blinds and absolutely no hands winnable after the flop.

I tried to console myself by saying "at least I held to my standards" but it seems when you have such lousy results you had to do something that caused them. My neighbor at the table at the Bicycle liked to let me see the cards he was playing after I folded, and I watched him go from $150 to $600 over a 1.5 hour period, playing Q-2s, 10-9o, A-3o, J-6s, etc, when he racked them up and headed home. Note he didn't win by aggressive or tricky play - he WON $450 by playing Q-5 offsuit and those other "great" starting hands. If it had been on-line, I would have charged that the site was rigged.

[/ QUOTE ]