If you go by sheer hourly profit/loss my STDEV is $729.5.

Problem is I'll have 12 hour sessions and 4 hour sessions which messes it up somewhat.

Yes, it is very high. I am at about $240 with 1400+ hours in last 2 years, and $265 with 570+ hours in 2012.

Yes, 2/5.

Is that standard deviation of your session wins or your hourly rates? Do you play similar session lengths or do you figure it averages out after that many hours?

Standard deviation per hour as generated by Poker Journal.

Around 300 sessions for 1400+ hours. ~15% of sessions between 2 - 3 hours, about 10% at 7 hours+, and the rest between 3 to 7 hours.

117 sessions on 1/2 2/5 (mostly 2/5)

718hrs

hourly 29.29

SD=307.87 per hr

Curious to know your % of winning sessions.

Also, your average session length is around 6hrs, longer than normal, I would suggest.

My average session length is closer to 4 hrs, although this includes table transfers.

I'm assuming that longer sessions would result in a lower SD. Any truth to this assumption?

74 winning (63.2%) 43 losing

I'm 51%. This, combined with a high SD, tilts me.

Maybe I'm LAG and don't know it? Maybe my room swings more than others?

% winning sessions is LOL.

The only thing you need to worry about is your hourly.

Winning more often than losing is easier on the psyche; don't underestimate that.

% winning sessions might be symptomatic of your ability to increase your hourly, though. I can't LOL about 51%; maybe my table selection is poor.

Serious guys? % winning sessions over like 100 sessions is LOL.

For me i play extra long sessions when im winning, and short ones when im losing.

It means NOTHING, because you skew your results when you decide to stand up.

Hourly rate and volume are the only things that matter.

Stop worrying about the little extras your iPhone app tells you.

My stats:

I'm at 31/ 54 which equals out to %57 winning sessions.

over 215 hours, $23.46 an hour. $198 std deviation.

Why longer when winning and shorter when losing?

Thats how it should be, for me atleast.

Such mentality makes as much sense as wanting to maintain more winning sessions than losing.

Same psychological idea, different way of thinking.

What is more important should be game condition if all other situations being equal.

Agreed.

Your hourly is going to be much higher when you have a good image than when you have a bad image. People are going to lay down to you, won't try to bluff you, etc. Bart Hanson talks about this a lot.

If we're running horribly people see that and take more shots at us. They don't respect our cbets. They might try a bluff because we never seem to win. And no one's tilt control is perfect, so the worse we do the more it's likely to impact our play.

The worst possible thing you can do is cut short your WINNING sessions and play long sessions when you're stuck. So doing it the other way around seems fine to me.

I play for as many hours as possible regardless so my win/loss is basically irrelevant.

This is the point. I'm trying to play less, but increase my hourly. I mean, we're all trying to increase our hourly, doh. But, I've been averaging 130hrs per month, while working part-time 80hrs, so I reckon I've been playing for too long, and, as a result, drifting to my B game without realizing it.

So, I'm aiming for 2bb more per hour, win-rate wise, and 20% less playing time. It equals more profit, long term, less stress too (and I reckon my winning % for sessions will creep up, if all goes to plan).

I'll admit my theoretical understanding of this issue is not what it should be, though.

Shorter sessions = fewer hands per session = increase in variance in % of winning sessions

So, logically, if you're beating the game, the longer your sessions, the higher your % of winning sessions?

For example, let's say you're crushing your game at 20bb per hr. Would your % of winning sessions be over, say, 70%?

Assuming a sample of 1000hrs plus.

Yes, because you are given more opportunities to apply the various advantages at your disposal to increase your winnings. This is in a vacuum where you only play your A game fwiw.

I'm not really sure that can be answered specifically, but in general, yes someone crushing the game will have more winning sessions on average than someone barely beating the game. Also, I really think you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Not quite a mountain, just a seemingly unnecessary mound. Your clear response has rid me of my mental niggle

I think we hit on something important. If we have unlimited time and unlimited tilt control, then sure we might as well play the same amount of time all the time.

I'm pretty free and I get comp'd rooms, so I'm there as much as possible and I play as much as possible. If I had a car and was driving down, I would stop when I'm playing bad and continue when I'm playing good.

If you're playing bad and/or running bad, you're not making your hourly and you may actually be losing money over the short term. No one gives you credit, so basically all you can do is try to hit a hand and stack. If you're playing your c game and fear you're going to tilt, there's nothing wrong with cutting it short.

If you're killing the table/playing great, you're making MORE than your hourly. Everyone thinks you're strong so they don't raise you with their strong hands, they fold to your cbets, and they check back and let you draw. You want to play as long as possible (as long as you're not prone to winners tilt and you don't start to spew).

Cutting winning sessions short to "bank a win" and playing to get unstuck when you're down is an extremely common mistake at LLSNL and is the opposite of what you want to do.

Obviously tilt control is important, especially if you define tilt broadly as non-A game play. So, if you have this part of your game sorted, then playing longer when you're beating the game is definitely for the best. You do need to factor in fatigue, for, not only can it make you less sharp, but less able to monitor when you slip from A to B (it's often quite a subtle slippage for me that doesn't involving spewing chips so much as widening your raising and calling range, playing too much OOP, getting too nitty at times, not 3betting, not getting value on the river etc.). As well, if you play long and deep, good players will watch you closely and adjust, so you might have to adjust too---not easy when've been grinding 7+hrs.

Sounds like you're primed for a matharon, though, PkriF, like it