|
|
#31
04-18-2005, 03:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
Hey King, just curious but have you read any of my posts about ditching a table when I lose 10BB? John [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I have read those. Trouble is, 10BB can be one hand. I buy into tables with 25BB, and getting down to 15BB really isn't all that rare for me. I judge the table more buy the players sitting at it and whether I think I'm a better player than they are or not, rather than how much I've lost at a table. KO 
|
|
#32
04-18-2005, 03:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
Well, I got down to about 5BB, reloaded, got down to 1BB and closed the table because it was getting cold in my basement and I recently got HoH and I like time to read before I go to bed. But I stayed responding to messages in this thread later than I wanted to, and ended up only reading a couple hand problems.. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
The table was actually quite a good table throughout the night. Varied between 30 and 42% VPIP. About 3 40-60% VPIP fish (icons) stayed at the table most of the time I was there, and one was directly on my right. He was hitting full-houses with 83o, tho, heh. He and I talked quite a bit throughout the night. KO
|
|
#33
04-18-2005, 03:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Hey King, just curious but have you read any of my posts about ditching a table when I lose 10BB? John [/ QUOTE ] I hope your posts say not to do this. [/ QUOTE ] Nope. But I don't advocate it for everyone either. It's just something I do that I feel works for me. I would have saved 39BB on that table of King's while still winning on the other tables. Didn't mean to reopen that argument here I was just curious if King had ever considered doing something similar; not necessarily at 10BB though. [/ QUOTE ] You shouldn't advocate it for anybody. Bad enough that you do it yourself but don't go giving other players bad ideas like this. You're going against standard deviation here, and standard deviation is your friend, for two reasons. It enables losers to win in the short term, (and thus keeps them in the game),which naturally means that sometimes the winners will lose. Plus, if you're playing optimal poker your standard deviation will be higher as you're taking more risks attempting to squeeze the maximum profit out of marginal situations. But in the LONG RUN this is good for you. Mason Malmuth says that a good player using advanced poker theory will have over 48% losing sessions. The winning sessions more than make up for this. Now, how do you know if you drop 10BB in the first half hour that that session wasn't going to be a huge one for you? [/ QUOTE ] Would you do me a favor? Because I'm really curious about this. Go to your sessions tab and rank by most money won to bring up your best winning tables. Check the top 8 or 10 and see how many hands you won in the first orbit and second orbit. In my top 6 winning tables at Party I've won at least 3 hands out of the first nine 4 out of 6 times. The rest of the top 10 show numerous wins in the first two orbits. Do your stats show anything similar or have I just happened to find some hot tables?
|
|
#35
04-18-2005, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
In my top 6 winning tables at Party I've won at least 3 hands out of the first nine 4 out of 6 times. The rest of the top 10 show numerous wins in the first two orbits. Do your stats show anything similar or have I just happened to find some hot tables? [/ QUOTE ] That's because you close the table after losing 10BB (or so)... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] It isn't unusual for me to start out down on a table, get down to 10-15BB on the table, win 2 hands and be even. I also probably don't have as long of sessions as most people. I have a lot of interruptions with family and everything else. KO
|
|
#36
04-18-2005, 04:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[quoteWould you do me a favor? Because I'm really curious about this. Go to your sessions tab and rank by most money won to bring up your best winning tables. Check the top 8 or 10 and see how many hands you won in the first orbit and second orbit.
In my top 6 winning tables at Party I've won at least 3 hands out of the first nine 4 out of 6 times. The rest of the top 10 show numerous wins in the first two orbits. Do your stats show anything similar or have I just happened to find some hot tables? [/ QUOTE ] I don't even have to do that. Two hours ago, party, I won 47BB over two hours. I was down 21BB in the first 40 minutes. But the table was full of really bad players. I was playing good. There you go. "There is no mathematical formula that tells you when you have won enough money to quit, and second, there is no mathematical formula that tells you when you have lost enough money to quit." Mason Malmuth, "Gambling Theory and other topics" I really recommend that you buy this book.
|
|
#37
04-18-2005, 04:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
The table was actually quite a good table throughout the night. Varied between 30 and 42% VPIP. About 3 40-60% VPIP fish (icons) stayed at the table most of the time I was there, and one was directly on my right. He was hitting full-houses with 83o, tho, heh. He and I talked quite a bit throughout the night. KO [/ QUOTE ] This is exactly the kind of table I get away from. Everything looks good stat-wise. You should be winning but you're not because one or two players are hot and are winning all the money. Every time I've tried to stick around and wait for things to change; they haven't and I proceeded to lose more money. Now granted, some of that might have been due to my play deteriorating as the fish kept winning. But by setting a mechanical stop point I don't care why I'm losing I only know I AM losing here so I'll go find someplace where I'm winning. Frankly, I don't see why there is such a reluctance around here to leave a losing situation to go find a winning one. It just seems like a logical thing to do. A 10 BB cutoff is probably too quick for most people but it's a number that seems to work for me.
|
|
#38
04-18-2005, 04:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The table was actually quite a good table throughout the night. Varied between 30 and 42% VPIP. About 3 40-60% VPIP fish (icons) stayed at the table most of the time I was there, and one was directly on my right. He was hitting full-houses with 83o, tho, heh. He and I talked quite a bit throughout the night. KO [/ QUOTE ] This is exactly the kind of table I get away from. Everything looks good stat-wise. You should be winning but you're not because one or two players are hot and are winning all the money. Every time I've tried to stick around and wait for things to change; they haven't and I proceeded to lose more money. Now granted, some of that might have been due to my play deteriorating as the fish kept winning. But by setting a mechanical stop point I don't care why I'm losing I only know I AM losing here so I'll go find someplace where I'm winning. Frankly, I don't see why there is such a reluctance around here to leave a losing situation to go find a winning one. It just seems like a logical thing to do. A 10 BB cutoff is probably too quick for most people but it's a number that seems to work for me. [/ QUOTE ] Two things. If you're at a table with FISH and you're losing, if you leave that table after donating just because you're getting sucked out on, then you need your head read. Secondly, with your mechanical stop point, what if the very next hand you were going to be dealt a monster? Or ten hands after? Or Thirty? Or.... you get my point? I think that maybe you have a slight problem with tilt and your play deteroiates if you get off to a losing start. Fair enough, you've identified a weakness and you've taken measures to address it. But don't go confusing that with regular poker theory and then go and advise other players to do the same.
|
|
#39
04-18-2005, 04:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
This is exactly the kind of table I get away from. Everything looks good stat-wise. You should be winning but you're not because one or two players are hot and are winning all the money. [/ QUOTE ] You are too superstitious. You realize that the cards on each hand are indepedent statistically speaking, right?
|
|
#40
04-18-2005, 04:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Holy Variance Batman! (n/c, small sample, rant post)
[ QUOTE ]
[quoteWould you do me a favor? Because I'm really curious about this. Go to your sessions tab and rank by most money won to bring up your best winning tables. Check the top 8 or 10 and see how many hands you won in the first orbit and second orbit. In my top 6 winning tables at Party I've won at least 3 hands out of the first nine 4 out of 6 times. The rest of the top 10 show numerous wins in the first two orbits. Do your stats show anything similar or have I just happened to find some hot tables? [/ QUOTE ] I don't even have to do that. Two hours ago, party, I won 47BB over two hours. I was down 21BB in the first 40 minutes. But the table was full of really bad players. I was playing good. There you go. [/ QUOTE ] So you're going to disregard anything I say because you won money 2 hours ago? You don't want to check your stats because it would take too much time or you're afraid I might be right? I'm glad someone around here has all the answers. I'll not clutter up this thread anymore.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
