How you you run/play in the blinds is all that matters

NLSoldier · #1 10-11-2005, 06:11 PM

Aug. 1-Sept. 15

28,000 hands

Winrate in blinds: BB (.13), SB (.03)
Winrate overall: 2.25 bb/10

Sept 15-Now

22,000 hands

Winrate in blinds: BB (.22), SB (.13)
Winrate overall: (1.56) bb/100

My winrates by position for the other positions are all very close. Even though my overall winrate is a whopping 3.75 bb/100 lower during the second set of hands.

Discuss?

cartman · #2 10-11-2005, 06:18 PM

I have noticed this as well. I do suspect that your performance in the blinds will be more variable (not necessarily worse, just more variable) than most since you 3-bet every hand that has a red card in it [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

Cartman

Stefan_K · #3 10-11-2005, 06:23 PM

maybee, maybee not ive been looking thrue some months but yeah i think i aggree with cartman that it fluktruates more in thoues possisions

Wynton · #4 10-11-2005, 06:23 PM

I don't know about variance, but I've long I've suspected that my poor play in the blinds - especially the BB - is what is stopping me from being a genuinely solid player.

I wish someone would run a seminar solely devoted to playing the bb.

NLSoldier · #5 10-11-2005, 06:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I have noticed this as well. I do suspect that your performance in the blinds will be more variable (not necessarily worse, just more variable) than most since you 3-bet every hand that has a red card in it [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

Cartman

[/ QUOTE ]

I havent been doing that nearly as much since starting to run bad. Maybe this means I should go back to it. Considering all that "running bad" apperently means is "running bad in the blinds"

cartman · #6 10-11-2005, 06:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I havent been doing that nearly as much since starting to run bad. Maybe this means I should go back to it. Considering all that "running bad" apperently means is "running bad in the blinds"

[/ QUOTE ]

Everytime I make a change for the better in my game I run worse than I did before. It is amazing really. Learning to value bet the river is a perfect example. Learning to fold to river checkraises is another. Then there's not automatically check-calling the river with Ace high when I have been the aggressor. I could go on and on.

I wish my results didn't know now what they didn't know then.

Cartman

SomethingClever · #7 10-11-2005, 06:28 PM

Agreed. It's really ridiculous if you think about it.

Wynton · #8 10-11-2005, 06:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Everytime I make a change for the better in my game I run worse than I did before. It is amazing really. Learning to value bet the river is a perfect example. Learning to fold to river checkraises is another. Then there's not automatically check-calling the river with Ace high when I have been the aggressor. I could go on and on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please do go on. Really.

Kyle · #9 10-11-2005, 06:38 PM

Interesting. In every bad run ive had my loses in the blinds have been significantly higher. However when i start back running good my loses in the blinds seem to creep back to around normal. Am i playing better than I was when running bad? Possibly but I doubt it is a meaningful amount unless i was on tilt. Like someone said earlier the blinds just may have more variance than the other positions. Does running bad in the blinds contribute to a large downswing? Well obviously yes but is it the sole factor?

redbeard · #10 10-13-2005, 05:19 AM

i would assume the blinds have a higher varience because we play a wider range in defending them than we do say utg. therefore it would make sense to me at least that they would be more subject to the varience. i would venture to say that the positional varience goes down as we go from bb to sb to button to co to utg+1 to utg.