When to leave a table?

[Leo Bello]

I have an interesting question... I have been winning a good par of sessions at 1/2 but having one problem. Knowing when to stop. Normally I get to my profit early in the session, like in the first 20 minutes, then I begin to even up, losing some, and winning some.
In other situations when I start falling behind, I manage to catch up and make it even after some time (normally a long time, little by little, tightening my play the most I can).
The problem is this become long sessions, 2, 3 hours to:
one had an even or low profit sessions
or
have a session with winnings I made practically in the first 20 or 30 minutes.

(one of the reasons seems to be people start reading better when I tighten, so some good hands like KK and AA end with low pots, after all slow playing after a raise pre-flop to cut limpers, is something difficult in limit, unless u have nuts and let people do the betting).

Anyway, how do you guys feel it? Set a goal/target per table? Set a time per session? Let it vary?

[Al Schoonmaker]

Read Mason's "The very silly subject of money management."

It's in one of his Essays books.

The stay or go decision should NEVER be based on pre-set criteria such as play for two hours or play until I have won X BB or lost Y BB.

From a profitability perspective, it should be based on your assessment of your future EV. If it is positive, stay. If it is negative, go, regardless of what has happened thus far. Of course, if you know that you play poorly after losing Y BB, quit when you have lost that amount, but the criterion is still your EV.

From other perspectives such as enjoyment, different criteria should be used. For example, if you don't like the game, go, even if you have a positive EV (unless you play for a living).

But regardless of the criteria, do NOT make your decision by some formula.

Regards,

Al

[jdl22]

Dr. AL,

I'm a little thrown off by saying you should NEVER play for a preset amount of time. I frequently will do so. For example, if I have to meet someone in a couple hours or really want to watch a soccer match that starts in 2 hours (currently the case) then I make the decision to play for only that long.

Surely this is ok?

[Wyrm2]

Assuming that you are playing online, if you feel like people are reading you too well, you can always get up and play a different table (That's the great thing about playing online [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

[D.H.]

[ QUOTE ]
Surely this is ok?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you can do that. In theory, to make the maximum amount of money you should always stay if it is positive EV. In reality, you have to stop at some point. And it won't make a huge difference if you always decide to play 2 hours and then stop.

What you might want to think about though is not sticking to a table where you are running bad. Maybe you are running bad 'cause the other players are better than you or have a good read on you. By having a set goal of not quitting until you reach a certain amount of money (or have a time limit) you could actually lose more. I'm not saying that you should always quit here, but have a look at the situation, analyze why you are running bad and act thereafter.

[Al Schoonmaker]

Of course, it's OK. In fact, I believe that balance is an essential part of a healthy life. Poker is an important part of my life, but I make sure it never becomes the center of it. I think far too many people let poker take over their lives.
If there is something you want to do at 4 PM, do it. If the game isn't fun, change tables or go home. If you feel tired, or see that you're playing badly, quit. If you had intended to play for an hour, but love the game and are crushing it (and you don't have an important commitment), keep playing.
I must add that Dan Negreanu, whom I like and respect, said he played a certain number of hours per day and went home when his "shift" was finished, even if he had to leave a great game, was stuck a lot, was running over the table, or whatever. His position made sense to me also.
I object to making the stay or go decision on some preset formula about results. You should not think in terms of playing until you have won or lost a certain amount.
Regards,
Al

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
The stay or go decision should NEVER be based on pre-set criteria such as play for two hours or play until I have won X BB or lost Y BB.

[/ QUOTE ]
It depends on why you chose the pre-set criteria. You need a legitimate poker reason.

Here's an idea I developed after reading your book. A tight-passive online player might be well-advised to change tables every 30 minutes. His style loses effectiveness when his opponents recognize and adjust to it.

Another example: a home game player is well-liked as a person but not for being a vicious TAG. Whenever he wins $100+ in one night he finds an excuse to go home before he inflicts unacceptable damage and wears out his welcome.

I recognize that these are applications of your future EV concept, but my point is that sometimes "arbitrary" rules about playing time or maximum wins can be as grounded in EV as any other poker strategy.

[schroedy]

The good sense of Mason's essay, notwithstanding, I think that I will continue to apply the Annie Duke/Howard Lederer rule of 30 Big Bets. Down 30, either I have misidentified some other players as the fish or the cards are running so badly against me that there is no hope. In either event, I think I will go read Dostoevsky, cruise the internet chat boards, see a movie with my wife, or doing something else more fun than getting my brains beat in.

My game is at its best, by the way, when I am with 30 BBs of my starting point either way.

[Al Schoonmaker]

I have no quarrel at all with your reasoning. More generally, I believe that decisions based upon an analysis of causes and effects are likely to be good ones. That is, if you can say WHY you are making a decision, it will tend to be a good one.
I can see that I stated my position rather poorly and that it was overly general. In fact, I violated a good rule: Never say "never."
As I noted in another thread, I find your posts original and well stated. I'm glad you're here.
Al

[Al Schoonmaker]

You wrote: "My game is at its best, by the way, when I am with 30 BBs of my starting point either way."

That point is critical. You are quitting when you get outside the range at which you play best.

Your position is a long way from quitting just because you've won or lost a certain amount. You're quitting because your game will deteriorate, a VERY different reason.

Regards,

Al