11 things to help pull out of a downswing...

[MrBig30]

[ QUOTE ]

But since I'm running about 3.5 BB/100 over 30k+ hands at 10/20 6max I'm going to keep my VPIP right about 28-29. Thanks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good for you.

The perfect VPIP probably depends on table conditions anyway.

Edit: Sorry to prolong this pointless hijack.

[Surfbullet]

Excellent post krishan. I've been doing 2,4,6,7,8,10,&11 lately and I'm running mediocre, not bad. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Hopefully I won't have to resort to #1(say it ain't so, grisgra!)

Surf

[Wynton]

Just want to encourage more people to comment about whether they change their table selection methods when running bad.

I believe Krishan is essentially stating that one should use the same criteria for table selection, but just do a better job at it.

[RunDownHouse]

I actively stay away from maniacs, since the last thing I want in a downswing is that kind of variance. Obviously dumping a bunch to a maniac is painful, but winning a ton would cause me to quit a session off right then and there. That's not good for my mentality either, as I really need to get x hands/month in.

[ QUOTE ]
Your insignificant sample size clearly proves your claim as much as RDH's blanket statement. Unfortunately, his blanket statement is backed up by years of excellent players winning at steady, high rates with 21/16 stats.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll have a bigger post about this tomorrow, but the short answer is that I've only been playing 6 max for about 3 months, and even during that time I've been busy winning 3BB/100 at 15/30 full and, since the 30/60 games opened up, about 1.6BB/100 there (about 100k hands between them this year). So my guess is that although 30k hands isn't necessarily representative, it probably is in this instance.

I don't want to sound like a snot about it, but I just think it's counterproductive to dismiss what someone has to say without explanation or consideration. It seems that too often thoughtful posts are overlooked or even insulted just because the poster isn't a known winner and suggests an approach different from the "accepted". In other words, in my not so humble opinion, 2+2 dogma isn't always right and unless we all consider alternative approaches none of us will learn anything.

You don't need to agree with everything or anything I say. But I do have a proven track record, which suggests that I might just know what I'm doing.

[Wynton]

May I preemptively request that people not let this valuable thread get hijacked by responding to Hock's views about his proven track record?

[rory]

Good post-- however, you also have to understand that statements of win rates and VPIP are exactly as productive as the posts that dismiss those things out of hand. They are not productive at all.

If you want to be taken seriously, you should post some hands which sort of highlight your looser philosophy working for discussion. The fact of the matter is that you very well could just be running uhh.. very well. We have no way of knowing without seeing some examples.

I am always interested in experimenting with new ways to play, so if you have a new way, I'd love to see some examples of it in action and your reasoning behind the non-2+2 dogmatic plays. Thanks!

[rory]

The title of this post is wrong, it should be:

11 things to help you improve your score.

7 things, I guess. 1, 3, 5, 6 might not. Everything else is just playing well-- if you aren't doing those things you are giving up a lot.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
The title of this post is wrong, it should be:

11 things to help you improve your score.

7 things, I guess. 1, 3, 5, 6 might not. Everything else is just playing well-- if you aren't doing those things you are giving up a lot.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the thing is some of the things can be done to degrees. And there is a balance between most of these things and time or profit. I'm saying do these things MORE if you want to increase the likelyhood of having a profitable session.

Krishan

[lastcoyote]

[ QUOTE ]
Just want to encourage more people to comment about whether they change their table selection methods when running bad.

I believe Krishan is essentially stating that one should use the same criteria for table selection, but just do a better job at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't play that well. I may be a 1 BB winner long term with my current abilities (if I never tilted). That said, here's what I have done since June 1 to help me win rather than lose over my last 35K hands. (This table selection strategy will probably hurt most winning players' hourly earn but it works for me.)

1) I open up four tables that have my "buddies" playing.

2) I open the top four "Avg. Pot Size" tables. (2nd skin)

3) When a seat opens up I don't sit down unless it is directly to the left or 2 seats to the left of my "buddy" or of a very loose (VPIP 55+) player. Preferably there are only 1 or 2 other tight players at the table as well.

Sometimes it's 15 minutes or more before I get a seat. Usually I'm observing some of the tables and getting some reads, taking some notes, etc.

This seems to work for me because I'm winning a decent amount now and I had never beaten the Party 5/10 6-max game before I started doing this.