|
|
#11
08-14-2005, 12:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
reread my post as i think i explained it well. but sometimes what i say goes astray to what i mean.
but i do think you can have wild swings but you dont have to have them. i guess some people must or have to play in a particular game and cannot move or find greener pastures for what ever reason. they may have to weather out big swings if they cant play at primo times of the game. this i cant relate to as i wouldnt do it. just as those that live most of their lives out where they dont want to be because a sick relative wouldnt be happy moving. there are so many easy games and places to play that winning an average of 4 or more times out of five should be easy. with loses smaller than wins. i think the answer may be that people dont play properly when the game changes. years ago on this forum i said i dont think i ever had a losing month. i dont remember ever losing more than about 50 bets in a game. i do admit i would tend to quit when getting stuck that much as it points toward being in a losing situation for the future as well. when i have ever seen players lose that much or more it always is because they are playing poorly for that game. sometimes you get stuck before realizing this but if you dont have the ability to discover you are playing a losing game that may lead to the big downswings. why would online lead you to have bigger downswings than live. it will have smaller ones as you are much more able to pick your spots. 
|
|
#12
08-14-2005, 12:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
[ QUOTE ]
why would online lead you to have bigger downswings than live. it will have smaller ones as you are much more able to pick your spots. [/ QUOTE ] Online games play on average 2 times as fast as live, so when you realize you are stuck 25BB live it could be 50BB online (or even more if you play several tables at a time). I don't think most of these young guns today apreciate how costly 20 minutes of tilt can be when you play 480 hands per hour.
|
|
#13
08-14-2005, 01:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
[ QUOTE ]
reread my post as i think i explained it well. but sometimes what i say goes astray to what i mean. but i do think you can have wild swings but you dont have to have them. i guess some people must or have to play in a particular game and cannot move or find greener pastures for what ever reason. they may have to weather out big swings if they cant play at primo times of the game. this i cant relate to as i wouldnt do it. just as those that live most of their lives out where they dont want to be because a sick relative wouldnt be happy moving. there are so many easy games and places to play that winning an average of 4 or more times out of five should be easy. with loses smaller than wins. i think the answer may be that people dont play properly when the game changes. years ago on this forum i said i dont think i ever had a losing month. i dont remember ever losing more than about 50 bets in a game. i do admit i would tend to quit when getting stuck that much as it points toward being in a losing situation for the future as well. when i have ever seen players lose that much or more it always is because they are playing poorly for that game. sometimes you get stuck before realizing this but if you dont have the ability to discover you are playing a losing game that may lead to the big downswings. why would online lead you to have bigger downswings than live. it will have smaller ones as you are much more able to pick your spots. [/ QUOTE ] Never having a losing month is impressive. Never losing more than 50 bets per game is also impressive. But I was asking not the max per session but rather, the max contigous downward deviation. In other words, if you have sessions of -40 -25 +15 -50 +60 +100, then your max downward deviation in this example is 100 from the -40 to the -50 before you bounced back and won it all back again plus. I think that measuring individual session losses is misleading since, as you say, someone may choose to quit after losing 30 bets and hence can brag that he's never had a bigger losing session. Really doesn't say much at all. The reason that online downswings can be greater is that people tend to have smaller winrate because 1. they are usually multi-tabling and hence not playing their best game at any one table and 2. the absence of visual cues reduces the expert's edge. Also, for a comparable level, online games are much tougher because they tend to attract a younger (hence more adaptable) and poorer crowd. (Poorer is significant cause it means if they're playing 100/200, then they're more likely pretty good cause they couldn't afford it otherwise. whereas casinos are full of older rich guys sometimes just giving it away.)
|
|
#14
08-14-2005, 01:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
[ QUOTE ]
why would online lead you to have bigger downswings than live. it will have smaller ones as you are much more able to pick your spots. [/ QUOTE ] Ray, i have a lot of respect for you, but that doesn't make this statement correct. Think of it this way. A player of your calibur with your game selectivity probably has amongst the biggest edges in a game that anyone would have expect for very low stakes games. Now have you ever logged two or three consecutive losing sessions? Or lost money over the course of a few thousand hands? I'm sure you have, it would be pretty much impossible for not to have this happen at one time or another. Since many people play 300-600 hands per hour online, which is 10-20 times as many hands as you can play per hour live, it is possible to have a downswing that would take a B&M player several weeks in one night. Now if you meant that over the same # of hands, an online player should expierence less downswings because he can exercise better game slection, that there isn't much to argue about. Also Ray, i don't know how much you play online, but like some others hand mentioned, playing so many hands per hour will decrease your winrate. It will also earn most players significantly more money in the ling run. But because of their decreased winrate, their swings will be greater even thought their net earn should be higher in the long haul. I have played online poker for a little over a year now, and have had excellent sucess by my standards. But i've also i swings on a daily basis that just aren't possible to have playing B&M, including a +250 BB day last year at 2-4 and a -120 BB at 30-60. I can tell you with absolute confidence that now matter how well i played, i was not going to less than 100BB that night, and i think i'm being generous saying i lost 20BB to bad play. Basically, i just wanted to clarify what you meant with these points and point out some reasons why i disagree with that statement. That all said, it's probably the first thing i've ever read of yours that i haven't agreed with.
|
|
#19
08-14-2005, 02:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
[ QUOTE ]
why would online lead you to have bigger downswings than live [/ QUOTE ] If you were playing your best, it would not lead to a bigger downswing than live poker. It does however make it more likely you will experience a bigger downswing in a given year than a live player. This is because you are playing much much more poker than the live player, do you see this? Your underlying advice seems to be that if you experience a downswing you should assume it is related to your advantage in your game slipping. This is absolutely true, and anyone who does not approach losing this way will probably find his way to the rail. However, this is not to be confused with the likelihood of a huge downswing through no fault of the player. The problem with this discussion in each of the threads is that these two issues are being discussed simultaneously. In a community of players it becomes much more common for variance to cause a big downswing in a single player. For example, while it is extremely unlikely that I will have a 300bb downswing, if there are 100 players just like me, it becomes more common. A person can recognize this reality while still treating a downswing appropriately according to your advice here.
|
|
#20
08-14-2005, 05:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: continuing 300 Bb thread
anyone experiencing a 300 bb downswing isnt likely to have been playing a winning game during that time.
too many people are taking one sentence out of my posts and using them as what i said in context. soory but i think i didnt make myself understood well enough and will move one from here.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
