Hi all, I've played 25k hands of PLO 2/4 per month the last 4-5 months. I've run fine overall and so far a winning player playing about a 25/17/8 (3 bet) /4 (agg), but I still have decent downswings each month. I'm looking to understand/discuss the standard sort of swings people are seeing, so that I can expect them as standard and essentially tilt less during those downswings....and stop burning an extra few buy ins each time!

Each month, or 25k hands, I typically have a couple of downswings of 12 to 15 buy ins, worst couple so far have been 20 buy ins. Is that pretty average for people? Have I actually been lucky to only see these size downswings?

I've seen people on these threads talk about horrific downswings of 50 buy ins as a worst case, do people feel that is likely and reasonably accurate?

I know these questions have huge variables, but it'd be great to gather a general feedback from people (sorry if this should be under a seperate thread, I thought this one seemed most appropriate).

Cheers

Over a 440k hand sample ive had two 50, one 60 and one 70 buy in downswing. This has been gone over loads of times. Use the search engine for omaha variance or something.

I use this from another thread somewhere on here. I assume it's accurate and it's pretty useful.

http://www.pokervariancesimulator.fr/

if you have regular downswings of 12-15buyins which is very common you should be prepared for the occasional 20-30 downswings. regularly playing with less than 40 buyins will likely get you broke at some point or have you playing at much lower stakes than your regular stakes. If you really want to be safe you need atleast 100 buyins. not everyone will experience downswings 50 buyins and the larger they get the more unlikely you will be to experience them.

any downswing over 50 buyin is crushing atleast for me and makes me doubt my capacity to play winning poker. Having a deeper practial understanding of variance helps you overcome those stretches IMO.

what about upswings?

Just keep a 200 BI roll and it shouldn't bother you at all.

Always go back and check up on your hands and make sure you are getting it in good.

If you start to notice a pattern that after a bad beat (or 2 or 3) you go on tilt and start to play bad then immediately after a bad beat get up from the computer and walk outside or go watch TV or something for about 30 minutes.

Money not lost is just as good as money won!

I'm 65 BI under EV on all-in luck my last 11K hands. Overall, it's a 75 BI downswing over that time period. This is far and away the worst downswing I've had over this short of a time period. In fact, this is the worst downswing I've had ever, and the only other ones that were comparable took ~40K hands to manifest.

AS much as it hurts to admit sometimes you're just meant to lose. Play everyhand perfectly and have losing days is so standard to me that I dont even care anymore. If I can confidently go over my hands and say I played well than Im ok with it. Varience is a dangerous mistress that goes both ways. This is how you have 20BI winning sessions when you play well and run amazing. Some days it just seems it was decided before I start playing that things will go well/badly and you just have to move on. In theory your big wins should be on par with your big losses over the long term. Its the grinding days that make all the difference in your bottom line.

Biggest looks to be 100 buy ins with no significant (15+) downswings

Unconfirmed rumors say they exist as well.

Yet, you continue to run like god vs me, so sick.

since we are not directly best friends and usually disagree about stuff you might get this wrong, but try not to. I feel no pleasure or anything like that hearing about your downswing.

but the thing is, regardless of short time luck a 75 BI downswing sounds totally insane in my ears. regardless of number of hands and at only 11k hands even more crazy. I doubt many posters here have had 60bb+ downswings for 100bb buy-ins regardless over how many hands.

from your posts (and I read lots of them) I think you are playing a ultra high variance style that require an enormous bankroll.

I am no super expert whatsoever myself and probably have lots of leaks but I think you should take a serious look at your game and maybe try to decrease the variance a bit.

you have often called me a passive nit and such and preflop I might be (at least some of the time and esp around ~100bb stacks) but it fits my overall game good and I often play this way not only to get more maneuver space postflop but also to decrease variance a bit so I am able to play higher stake than otherwise.

just my 2 cents, listen to it or ignore it, up to you and I really hope you dont get mad or anything, just trying to be honest about what I think.

edit: saw the BBV post after I wroted this fwiw.

Sry fro my english ...but i think all of you will understand me

I agree with a 100 BB as a Bankroll, u will have in Omaha a higher varince as in NL ...13 - 20 stacks down, i wld say is pretty common

Bu even to get 25 stack ups is also np in Omaha

My self i have 50 BB normally, and i see also its not enough ...but going down a limit is pretty sick , better i deposit then to play my limit

Losing happens, and can be unpleasant. Winning also happens, and generally isn't all that much fun, either.


Every one of us who has decided to devote a serious degree of energy to this game has accepted all of the above. This is what we signed up for. All we can really do is try to separate our day to day results from life as a whole, I think. Otherwise we find a new hobby?

FYP