Normal Variance?

Poker stars ST S&G record:

Aug 26 to Sept 6

53 games played.

27 bad beats (I went in with the best and lost)

13 coin tosses lost out of 18

1st place finishes 3
2nd 4
3rd 18

money finishes 25/53 47%

It just seems that once I get to 3 player, it makes no difference what I play, I am usually toast. I can have the other guy crushed right to the river, then they hit thier 4th running card to get a straight with 5-3os, and other such hands.

I need to convert the 3rd place finishes to 1st or 2nd, because at the rate I am doing it I very slowly run out of cash. I played all 53 games plus a couple WCOOP $1 games for $20.

If I play really tight, 3 up, I just end up blinded out. In one game I had 7010 chips (13500 in play) with 4 players remaining, and went out 4th because the other players started going all-in and I was virtually card dead. (1 guy went in 8 times and another went all-in 4 x in the last 22 hands)

Comments

  • Crazcnuk wrote: »

    53 games played.

    27 bad beats (I went in with the best and lost)

    53 games is not enough.

    Would need to see the "badbeat" hands. But I suspect many are not and some would be all in with AA and 3BB and losing to K8 in the Big Blind type of hands.
  • Of course, but that is still a 'bad beat'. Even if you want to relegate them to the 'coin toss' category, that is still losing 40 coin tosses out of 50 games.

    There are several where I had AA or similar and the other guy had 5-3os. Bet 5x preflop, called, hit crap on the flop, or even a third A, and raise 1/2pot, called, hit rag on the turn, raise, called, another rag on river, and the guy hits a straight.

    The problem is not that he won, but that he snap called all the way to the river, like he knew what was coming.

    I have hand notes for all these games, but it would take a while to type it all in.

    My problem is, that I am not prepared to play for another 5 years to wait for the variance to change to my favor.

    I have tried to play 'tight-aggressive' and don't get enough playable hands to keep the stack up. Top that with idiots willing to play any two cards, who get lucky all too often, it makes playing poker impossible.
  • you cashed in half of them and you're not happy :o
  • No, because I still lost money. The idea is to MAKE some! :^)
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    No, because I still lost money. The idea is to MAKE some! :^)

    You do realize that 90% or more of people who play online are overall losers right?
  • Richard~ wrote: »
    you cashed in half of them and you're not happy :o

    Ran it through an ROI simulator, and yes he is losing (approx -4%) , but it is a verrrry small sample size.

    My advise is to study the game and find your leaks. Like I said 53 games is far to low to be an accurate gauge.

    With the sample size provided, you can expect your worst OOTM streak to be 21 games and at times be down 40 Buy Ins
  • "You do realize that 90% or more of people who play online are overall losers right?"

    Yes, but I don't that as reason to join them

    I'd love to plug 'leaks' but most of my leaks are idiots who play any two cards and suck out.

    This might be a small sample, so multiply it by 50, and you'll have a better sample size with the same results.

    This is just my latest experiment.
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »

    I'd love to plug 'leaks' but most of my leaks are idiots who play any two cards and suck out.

    WRONG!!!
    This might be a small sample, so multiply it by 50, and you'll have a better sample size with the same results.

    This is just my latest experiment.

    It's not that simple.

    What is your PS Name? I can pull your stats.
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    I'd love to plug 'leaks' but most of my leaks are idiots who play any two cards and suck out.
    thats not a leak....

    Crazcnuk wrote: »

    This might be a small sample, so multiply it by 50, and you'll have a better sample size with the same results.
    this isn't how the math works....
  • I actually tryied Poker Professor's 'Tight Aggressive' course on PS, PP, 888, Bodog, PKR and wasn't getting enough playable hands (according to thier list) to keep up a stack. I often go 40+ hands w/o 1 playable hand on the starting hands chart

    With all but 888 and Bodog, each site let me win for the first 2 days, then the deck went cold. The other 2 sites starting hammering me with KK's losing to rag rag in the first game or 2.
  • "With the sample size provided, you can expect your worst OOTM streak to be 21 games and at times be down 40 Buy Ins "

    Since I never have 40 buy-ins, I never get here. Most of these games were $3.50 buy in, with about 1/3 $1.50 buy in.

    I start with $20 and see how far it goes. I usually go up for a bit, be it 2 games or 2 days, then I just 'break even' which is actually a slow leak until I am down under $5 at which time I just throw my chips away.

    My actual earnings on this 53 games was $154.14, with knockout bonuses, but my buy-ins added up to $139.66 (Not counting the WCOOPs)
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    I actually tryied Poker Professor's 'Tight Aggressive' course on PS, PP, 888, Bodog, PKR and wasn't getting enough playable hands (according to thier list) to keep up a stack.
    the trick is to get a bigstack and keep it because big stacks win more flips
  • Yes but the only way to do that is to go all-in a few times early, and win. However, usually you just go out early.

    So if you operate on a 'go out 1st or 9th' mentality, that may work. I can only play the hands I am dealt, with a few well placed bluffs here, and there.Playing aggressively, in position when possible.

    Also, I find the little stacks win more flips. They seem to have an all-in bonus.

    In some of my games I can be winning 20% or more tof the hands, and still have few chips.
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    Yes but the only way to do that is to go all-in a few times early, and win.
    no thats not the only way at all....my strategy for example is to win chps off the people who feel the same way you do.
    Crazcnuk wrote: »
    However, usually you just go out early.
    No really i don't tho.

    Crazcnuk wrote: »
    I can only play the hands I am dealt, with a few well placed bluffs here, and there.Playing aggressively, in position when possible.
    this being your strategy is the source of your complaints...
    Crazcnuk wrote: »
    Also, I find the little stacks win more flips. They seem to have an all-in bonus.
    of course we both know this is just silly talk though.
    Crazcnuk wrote: »
    In some of my games I can be winning 20% or more tof the hands, and still have few chips.
    it sounds like you have a habit of putting your chips in the pot when you are a dog to the odds of winning the pot....
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »

    I'd love to plug 'leaks' but most of my leaks are idiots who play any two cards and suck out.

    These are the players that make the game profitable.
  • compuease wrote: »
    You do realize that 90% or more of people who play online are overall losers right?

    You do realize that this stat is a smidge on the low side, right?
  • darbday wrote: »
    no thats not the only way at all....my strategy for example is to win chps off the people who feel the same way you do.

    But you are making some bad assumptions here. You have no idea how I play. I often have the chip lead. I take chips off people who feel like you, if I have the cards to do it. If not, I will sit tight, which means you are not getting my chips that way either.


    No really i don't tho.

    I do. If I start making big plays, with nothing, early, I tend to get taken out because bad players will call any kind of raise, and, often, hit me hard for a big chunk of my stack.

    this being your strategy is the source of your complaints...

    No it isn't. My complaint is that I get beat by worse hands too many times. I am one or two place changes from making money.

    of course we both know this is just silly talk though.

    Is it really? You haven't noticed that short stacks often go in with mediocre cards, out of necessity, and hit? It happens often enough that I call it the 'shart stack all-in bonus'. I can send you my spreadsheet, if you like. I keep hand written notes of every hand.

    it sounds like you have a habit of putting your chips in the pot when you are a dog to the odds of winning the pot....

    Then you haven't been listening. If I go all-in, pre-flop, with AA, QQ, KK, AQ, or AK against 5-3os, 96os, or lesser hands then I am obvisoulsy not the dog. If I have chips I am not going in with crap. I usually have a premium pocket and am calling the low stack guy who is going all-in with whatever he can find. If I am short stacked, then I may be the one going all in with less than ideal cards, but I am still not going in with junk until absolutely necessary, so often I am in a coin-flip situation, which I lose about 60-70% of the time.
  • compuease wrote: »
    You do realize that 90% or more of people who play online are overall losers right?
    Milo wrote: »
    You do realize that this stat is a smidge on the low side, right?

    FMP.... for clarity... lol



    P.S. I sense a trend in this thread.... OP will undoubtably disappear shortly... After he realizes no sympathy....
  • [QUOTE=Crazcnuk;280124
    I'd love to plug 'leaks' but most of my leaks are idiots who play any two cards and suck out.
    [/QUOTE]
    Hobbes wrote: »
    These are the players that make the game profitable.

    Hello? I heard someone calling my name.
  • Heh, that's the difference between the 'lucky' and the rest of us, who try to rely on skill and math, but get stomped on by the blessed! :^)

    I don't expect sympathy. Some pointers would be appreciated, but I am not going to listen to people who assume they know everything.

    I have data...
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    Then you haven't been listening. If I go all-in, pre-flop, with AA, QQ, KK, AQ, or AK against 5-3os, 96os, or lesser hands then I am obvisoulsy not the dog. If I have chips I am not going in with crap. I usually have a premium pocket and am calling the low stack guy who is going all-in with whatever he can find. If I am short stacked, then I may be the one going all in with less than ideal cards, but I am still not going in with junk until absolutely necessary, so often I am in a coin-flip situation, which I lose about 60-70% of the time.
    im listening but what im saying is you have been putting your chips in with worse cards. and that you are folding too much.

    and i just wanna say you will lose a coinflip 50% of the time and im sorry but there is no way to change that :(
  • Someone said that to be successful at single table tourneys you have to frequently race with the worst of it. And that makes a lot of sense
  • im listening but what im saying is you have been putting your chips in with worse cards. and that you are folding too much.

    and i just wanna say you will lose a coinflip 50% of the time and im sorry but there is no way to change that sad.gif

    Actually, you are the one not listening, as I am complaining about going in with the BEST of it and losing. No one expects to win with the worst of it, but we try it on occassion.

    Also, I am complaining about losing far MORE than 50% of the time, as that is the point. If I was losing coin flips 50% of the time, it would be as expected.

    "Someone said that to be successful at single table tourneys you have to frequently race with the worst of it. And that makes a lot of sense "

    Actually it only makes sense if you get short stacked and can't wait for better cards. We all go in with the worst of it, from time to time. It can't be avoided. However, we don't expect to win when we do, and aren't surprised when we lose, we just feel upset that we didn't have better cards, or that we can't suck out like all the other players at the table.

    What IS a piss off is when you are always trying to be in with the best of it, and usually are, but still lose most of the time.
  • Crazcnuk wrote: »
    What IS a piss off is when you are always trying to be in with the best of it, and usually are, but still lose most of the time.

    AKA playing like the fishes I wither down and finally suck out on sending them crying to some forum while I confirm a withdrawal so I can go to school another month.

    As for the original question, yes, this is very normal varience
  • Have you looked at purchasing PokerTracker or PokerOffice? I used PO to keep track of every hand and it helped a lot. I don't use the HUD anymore.

    Have you read Arnold Snyder's 2 books - The Poker Tournament Formula #1 and #2? Much different than Harrington and a little more relevant to faster blind structures.
  • I've lookd, but haven't actually purchased one, yet. I keep track of each hand, by hand, right now, on an excel spreadsheet form that I print out. Of course this doesn't give any sort of analysis, but it does give me time to think about each hand as it is played.

    I haven't read any books, either. Will have to look into a few though.

    I've actually found an interesting game type, on Winner. They have 'double-up' Sit'n'gos, 10 seat where if you finish 5th or better you double your buy-in. They also have 250% deposit bonus.
  • Based on what I pulled from Sharkscope, the ROI simulator shows you to be a bit (-7%) of a losing player. Not too bad considering.

    One thing that I noticed is that you play a lot of bounty STT's. You should avoid these (imo) until you get a better handle of your game in normal speed STTs
    I keep track of each hand, by hand, right now, on an excel spreadsheet form that I print out.

    And stop doing this.

    You could also download Universal Replayer and load your hand histories into it, You can then replay the entire tournament.
  • You have to remember, that when I get down to my last buy-in (bankroll) or two I usually burn it off to skew the stats, and because I am frustrated... Bankroll tilt as opposed to game tilt.

    I do know that I slowly lose. As I mentioned, I played all 53 of those games, plus 3 WCOOP $1.10 tourneys on my initial buy-in of $20.

    So basically, I can get hours of play 'fun' for minimal cost, but I would rather be on the winning side of things.

    You don't think it's a good idea to manually track my hands?

    I also keep spreadsheets of my game results.
Sign In or Register to comment.