This type of variance is possible ? it is PLO 2 zoom, I know that they are few hands but it can be for so much?

https://imgur.com/a/7s2vyJm

yes it can... and even more than this... the sample size is not very large so your results will be affected by variance.

Plo2 zoom is tougher than what ppl might think because of the rake and because of allot of multitabling nits. Also your graph looks like you are running bellow EV so its not surprising you couldn't beat plo2 so far.

Short answer is don't focus on the results... its only 10$ anyway. Focus on learning the game.

Thanks for you explanation!!!!

This is 20 BI below EV in around 20 k hands

Enviado desde mi LG-K530 mediante Tapatalk

Don't use your EV line as an indicator of whether or not you should be winning or losing, that will likely just depress you.

Use your EV line as a loose indicator as to whether or not you are making good decisions and getting your money in the middle, in good spots. It doesn't tell the entire story, just part of it.

Focus on solid fundamental play at the low limits, and avoid any sort of fancy play mentality. The people you are up against for the most part have no idea what you might be trying to represent.

Yes, and many people have experienced it HOWEVER when it happened 5-10 years ago you'd also be getting 8bb+/100 in rakeback.

Also note that it's VERY likely your mental game is suffering right now, so you need to be very careful about changing your game.

Yes , Im want to not modify my game but is hard. Now I have doubts if the EV is telling me the true or not

Enviado desde mi LG-K530 mediante Tapatalk

I did 20 bi under in a sesh years back, was fun

i have managed to do 21 BI bellow EV in one session... 3100 hands

i nearly lost my mind

I went 35bi under ev in 40k hands at NL earlier this year. I cannot imagine complaining about variance in PLO. You just gotta shrug it off and keep playing a +ev game. gl

Hey man!

I'm a PLO100-200 winner and I've just had a 25k hand break even EV stretch at PLO10. **** like this happens and unfortunately there are not 10 midstakes guys playing PLO10 to see how often /how much of it was my fault

Try to not focus on results on PLO10 too much, it's only a training game and not where serious money is made. Make money elsewhere and try to study the game a lot so you can beat PLO50+, preferably PLO100+ as rake gets lower there.

If you still want to grind up a bankroll online, I run a $24 to $1000 BR challenge as mentioned, you can find it on youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21tB_GfGEJo

hey OP thats a brutal run, remember that variance will also work in your favor and you will have insane upswings that are just as dramatic, 'the sword cuts both ways' or whatever. good luck man keep grinding

Many thanks to all for the comments, I had never exchanged experiences in the forum and this helps me a lot to know that this can happen and that I have to put more volume.

Thank you!

I think one big takeaway is that zoom sucks unless you like doing battle with mass volume nits. Poker is a lot easier when you play people who play crappy hands.

Pretty much sums it up.

The concept is great, but it should be your last resort for game choice. Focus your volume on regular tables where your opponents get bored and play hands they shouldn't instead of quickly folding to the next good hand. You'll also be able to better identify the looser players and can work on isolating them and maximizing value.

Yeah I think Zoom is cancer and really hate that it gets so much attention through streaming and discussion. If your goal is to win at poker, the two best things to do is to work on fundamentals and find bad players. Zoom will be great for the former and terrible for the latter.

This being said, having a table of Zoom up can't hurt, but I'd much rather 6 table in games w/ goofballs.

one advantage of regular tables is that you can often choose your seat and have constant position on a weaker/deeper player(s) to your right

im surprised to see people arent into Zoom/fast poker, i think its one of the best forms of poker, it eliminates so many problems and inefficiencies.

Sure the pools can be tougher/nitty, but the pools are always changing, sometimes they are the opposite.

One potential problem with zoom is that there is so much volume taking place that the bad players get annihilated and they cant stick around for long, which fosters a tougher ecosystem

Zoom is great at microstakes. Yes its harder than regular tables, your win rate will be lower and pokerstars rakeback is non existent but it doesn't matter because you shouldn't play the microstakes to make money. My argument is based on the fact that you can get more money for your time from a regular job. At the same time it makes sense to play microstakes when starting out because you will inevitably lose money until you learn the game and you want to minimize that initial monetary investment by playing lower stakes.

So for a new player the main goal shouldn't be to find the best way to invest their 50$-200$ but how to invest their time as efficiently as possible. That translates into how to improve their game as fast as possible and zoom is great for that purpose because it allows you to increase you volume x3 or even x10 depending on how many tables you play. In a game as complicated as plo that's priceless especially for new players. It can help you get a good idea of the swings that are possible to happen and get accustomed to them allot faster. You get in allot more interesting spots and see a larger variety of situations. From that perspective the player pool being harder is not even a bad thing.

Short answer is that in zoom you generate allot more experience for the same amount of time you invest and that's the most important thing when first starting out.

this is great

Enviado desde mi LG-K530 mediante Tapatalk

It is probably best to start at PLO5 regular, that might be the most solid. One can think about the zoom after PLO10 regular.

There are some up to horrible fishes at PLO2 zoom but one does not face them very often. One might lose if one has zero PLO experience even if one is educated to play solid to good PLO. Later one should be able to get a win rate by simply playing solid and patiently, adjusting to general ranges, taking the donations when they happen.

Zoom is too tight and/or tough for live practise; a waste of time. NLH zoom might be a bit different story. The overly tight and tough PLO zoom games are not very realistic for anything and if one gets to PLO25 (not losing), not necessary.