Bad run. PT stats. Telling?

[Rotterdaum]

I had 30 buy ins for the 400 NL when the run started

These hand histories don't encompass the whole story

and the reason I played variuos stakes is exactly the bad run - my bankroll diminished and it made sense to move down

Obviously I'd want to stick with 600 NL [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[Malachii]

Your problems are probably postflop.

[sawseech]

i've always hovered from 22-24%, but that's just me; fullring numbers in the vicinity of 21/6/2.5

maybe you're firing too many second shells and not allowing people the comfort level necessary to demonstrate their holdings while simultaneously pot-committing yourself with AK miss

which is fine when they have nothing, but in fullring people have pairs, and those pairs get played

or maybe people started sitting back on you and now you're figuring out how to play TAG

i don't see how you can have those stats and, even with players sitting back on you, still manage to lose at that rate without spewing

it doesn't take much
say, 3 hands (look at AQ/bigpairs EP/AK button for starters) and 2 positional errors (opening utg, highjack are usual culprits), then misvaluing 5% of the time on the flop would be enough to create a problem of this scale

alternately, fewer pf errors then misvaluing 2.5% of the time, then making proportionally larger errors on the turn would also do it

it's also possible that you weren't nearly as good as your previous results indicated, and are now being hunted by players who have figured you out

if you haven't done so and feel it necessary, i'd change ids and hide from the search function

that said, it should be noted that your sample is microscopic and you could simply be running horribly

[Rotterdaum]

Of the awful 30K hands, in all honesty, I've tilted away 4-5 hands, and not on the higher stakes. So that is not a big issue and aside from that I don't understand the change. Objectively it seems like either I was running incredibly well before and this is what I really am, or that this is a streak of horrible luck.

So assuming that spewing means playing idiotically/tilting, I don't feel that's an issue, at least I don't feel the difference between how I'm playing now and in the good days.

Also I JUST started playing on party hopi8ng for a positive change, and awful results contineud for another 8k hands so far, but I'm doubt I'm already being stalked there.

About TAG and LAG, well, I've been TAG for months but by observation I noticed that good LAG playesr are more adaptive and have more of an edge in better skilled games so I tried my best to use that style. But I tightened back up in the middle of the losing streak because while LAG seems to win more on the good days, it also seems to lose more on the rainy ones.

What is highjacking? Betting into an aggressor in an attempt to steal?

It's quite shocking that 30 000 hands can be considered a microscopic sample for some topics by those serious about poker.

[sawseech]

if this is all on party and you've just started there you're probably being bluffed alot and folding the best hand

on party, once someone thinks they can bluff you they will never stop until you deliver repeated hard lessons

hijacking is more a limit concept. A bluffs, B raises a marginal hand, C 3bets air, all run.

and, yes, 30k hands is so nothing.

[tree_stump]

Sample size is a little small, but look at your PFR numbers... From NL1 up, you lose about a percent with each jump.

Any chance that the money is subconsciously affecting your play and you're losing the AG from your self-proclaimed LAG? The effect of that may not show in PT stats, but will result in timid, passive play post-flop - and that would absolutely kill you.

[Rotterdaum]

Well NL 100 and up is all full ring and 7-8% PFR is not that low for full ring is it? I don't think it's considered timid

-most of this was on PokerStars, I just-just moved to party

[tree_stump]

I'm not necessarily saying that your PFR is weak - I'm saying it's going down as you move up.

My guess is that something is subconsciously affecting your play, and that it's manifesting itself more strongly *post* flop, which you're not going to see here.

[iceman5]

30K hands may or may not be enough hands to get a good idea of your true win rate, but its definately enough hands to see that you have some major leaks somewhere with these win rates (loss rates).

Thats too many hands for it to be bad luck at that high a rate. Youre barely breaking even at $100NL. Anyone who is a pretty good $200 or $400 NL player would crush $100NL even with quite a bit of bad luck.

I have no idea what the problem might be just by looking at these stats, but there is most certainly a problem somewhere beyond bad luck.

[elus2]

[ QUOTE ]
These hand histories don't encompass the whole story


[/ QUOTE ]

you'd get a better response if you included ALL of the hand histories during your bad run.