My step up to 2/4 level

[Peter-23]

I don’t really mean much by this post but this is an example how things can turn out when going up a level.

Have played 1/2 for quite a while and played a winning game, about 1.5 BB/100, for about 20k hands. Not a strong win rate but solid I think.

I have worked up a bankroll of $1200 witch is of cause 300BB for 2/4 level and as you all know is recommended minimum by many players.

So I thought, I’m playing two 1/2 tables and quite sure that I play a solid controlled game. I got a lot to still learn but I think my basic game is just fine and I have also learned to control my tilt factor. (Took a bit of doing that one).

So, why do I pay the rake, let’s go! If I play one table it’s about the same as before but cheaper rake and I can concentrate more on the game. The unknown factor was the opposition but I have to take them on some time. (I can always go back to 1/2 level if necessary)


OUCH!!!


After 1200 hands I’m down 50BB.

But I’m not really worried because of these results:
(Well perhaps I am a bit, or at least concerned)

KK -9.25 BB
KJs -8 BB
AA -7 BB
ATs -6.75 BB
A3s -6.5 BB
QQ -6.5 BB
T6 -6.5 BB (flopped TTT from big blind lost to KT)

Equals 50.5 BB

Apart from the fluke T6 trip these should be winners, and will in time!

I’m also down on 99, QT, KQs, AKs and a number of lower Axs.


Is this variance or what!!! I have been down more than 50 BB before but not on AA, KK and QQ like this wow.

Maybe my reasons for going up was impaired but I think I stay a while longer, if you think I’m out of my mind please let me know!

[Redmen62]

I'm currently down on the month with the following hands:
KK (biggest loser)
AKo
JJ
AQs/AQo

and was down with AKs and QQ until last night. It's pretty easy to figure out why there's a such a large number of hands needed to get an accurate handle on a win rate.

[Peter-23]

I agree.

To try to get a feel for the variance I started to check what my win rate would be if the strong hands that I was down on, for some period, was zero.

I found that for almost any periods of 500 hands or more I would be ahead or at least down very little.

Even if it's a blip period and no science that greatly improved my confidence in my game.

[Fnord]

The rake strucuture for most 1/2 games is horrible compared to most 2/4 games and the players aren't much better. Hence, I think most people are wasting their time at 1/2.

[gvibes]

I have separate databases for .5/1 and 1/2.

I have ~12k hands at .5/1 and ~2k at 1/2.

AKs and AQs are losers at both levels. I ain't worred. 74s and 84s are winners at both levels. Sample size, man.

Also, [ QUOTE ]
T6 -6.5 BB (flopped TTT from big blind lost to KT)

[/ QUOTE ]
You should probably get that deck checked.

[Redmen62]

[ QUOTE ]
The rake strucuture for most 1/2 games is horrible compared to most 2/4 games and the players aren't much better. Hence, I think most people are wasting their time at 1/2.


[/ QUOTE ] I agree. This is why I moved straight to 2-4 when moving over from Party NL this month. I figured the best combination of education/profit can be found at 2-4 right now. It's frustrating, however, to put session after session in on the suspicion that you're a significant winning player at that limit, unstead of having a solid idea of winrate to console yourself with after every 2-outer.

[Peter-23]

No I mean the flop made TTx and I made a trip TTT. My opponent made a better trip. Nothing strange.

Sorry for not being clear on this