Wrong thread

Yeah, hardly ever table change, you are right. I actually did later that night and it ended up alright. I will need to do it more if I keep going there vice driving the extra 30 mins.

It's 16x my wr. 30 percent of the sample was playing stakes lower than I play now so that prolly skews it I guess

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

Took a shot at the only 2/5 that runs once every 3-4 months and got crushed.

Game is softer then the 1-2 and I played like a fish, fak.

shortstacking confirmed not profitable live, must always buy in full to demonstrate ego and XXXX length to entire table... not possible to win short stacking- 2+2 says so, thus it is so

anyone who shortstack= bad- don't do it, save up until you can buy in full

repeat not possible to win shortstacking

No one said it's not possible, just that it's not optimal, and stunts your growth if done exclusively.


Which is absolutely true.

Argument for short stacking is always related to BRM in one form or another.

Nobody in their right mind would knowingly play a weaker opponent with less money, if winning the most money is the sole objective.

100% truth.

Somewhat related; last night had a bit of a debate with idiot on my right that luck boxed his way to big stack. I was really deep as well. New guy (weak player) sits down and idiot gets upset because he thinks new guy has a little more than 300 cap. I asked idiot why he cared, don't you want the opportunity to win as much as possible with your big stack? He replies "rules are rules". New guy didn't have more than cap, just odd mix of red and whites.

At 1/2 or 1/3 where I'm very comfortable verses standard opponents , I always want to cover everyone at the table. I also constantly top up to max cap if I fall more than 50 below. Case in point, last night I dropped to 200 in 300 cap game in a tricky hand versus bad wanna be pro kid lag. I immediately topped up to 300, very next hand get it all in pre-flop with AA against same lag's AK. So I won a 600 pot instead of 400.




Sent from my Nexus 7 using 2+2 Forums

The flip side to this is my bankroll strategy. I really draw quite heavily from Tommy Angelo with being a great quitter. In order to do that I really focus on a two buy in limit per session. If I fire two bullets and lose them I go home.

With the above in mind, I remember recently where I got crippled to 35bb with set over set on my first bullet. I nearly did as you said and topped up straight away. Instead though I opted to try and rebuild the short stack leaving my second bullet up my sleeve.

Luckily I did because 5 hands later had KK v AA and would have stacked off the second bullet too. Instead I lost the 35bb, bought in with second bullet and went home with 400bb 4 hours later...

Point is it can swing both ways at times I guess.

Cheers Luke

Sent from my SM-N900 using 2+2 Forums

That's why I wrote this earlier:

----------------------------

That's the problem with stop-loss, you are essentially forced to play a less than optimal strategy because you cannot lose the BI.

Truth is that it often swing the wrong way, but memory of that "one time" makes you think that it swings both ways.

Richard, you're probably right, except there is something to be said for my mindset when I'm in for just one buyin and even more so if I bring it back from the dead so to speak haha.

I feel like my mind and game is really good, strong and patient when I'm inside my stop loss. Look, works for me and that's all I can say.

Cheers Mac

Sent from my SM-N900 using 2+2 Forums

If I didn't have a stop loss I could blow through so much money in a single day. In fact, I've ignored my stop loss on a few occasions and blown through large amounts of money. The few times I've tried to buy in for the full $2k at 5/10 I've had absolutely miserable results. One time I blew $6k (3 buyins) in like 4 hours at a super soft table. When something like that happens I become depressed and won't want to play for like a week (or worse I will play with a terrible mindset).

My reasons for setting a stop loss are purely mindset (mental game) related. I have good days and I have really really bad days. It's hard to imagine anyone with a mental game as bad as mine to actually make a living playing this game, yet I've been able to do it successfully for over 3 years now. My mental game is 100x better than it once was but it's still terrible and a constant area of improvement for me.

BTW, b4 anyone comments on my SN there is a character restriction. It should be NeverLosesAtPokerWhenIPlayMyAGame

nothing wrong with recognizing we are not perfect emotionless poker robots and adjusting our play around that

of course, optimal is to strive towards becoming a perfect emotionless poker robot, but that's really hard

I don't have a hard stop loss because that's dumb and like Richard says introduces that new problem where you're scared to lose and hit your stoploss. But I recognize that I tilt after losing a lot and I am prepared to leave if I catch myself playing like an idiot and the game isn't awesome.

I don't think anyone ever took your SN seriously. LOL. Hoped it was true, but as a reg I realize it is next to impossible to win more than 2/3-3/4 of your sessions.

As for SS and topping off, it is my new goal to never dip more than 25 percent below by original buyin. Last few sessions I've found myself very shortstacked a couple of times and not topped off. Almost cost me in a big way.

No more. Must maximize wins rather than minimize losses.

At least you know your CURRENT limitations but in order to EVER hit your potential as a poker player you should probably work on your mental game to where this limitation doesn't stunt your growth

Of course, understand that, for now, this is how I best process the issue though and as time goes on I find myself being stronger and stronger.

Agree with your statement though.

Cheers Mac

Sent from my SM-N900 using 2+2 Forums

oh I had been meaning to post this here, thought it was kind of interesting



someone on a different site said something to the effect of "i just go and play poker for six hours and i typically make $200", and I thought nah he doesn't know what he's talking about, there isn't really a typical session it's all over the place! I bet he's just some dunce who played five sessions and got lucky! So I sorted all my sessions by win and made a chart. Probably 60/40 2/5-1/2, several hundred sessions. Basically it's just a really thin line of each session in descending order -- long/flat means lots of sessions fall in that range, short/sharp means few sessions are. So if you take a 25% chunk horizontally it means 25% of my sessions fall in that range. As I thought, yeah there's no such thing as a "typical win". As expected it makes a pretty parabolic curve.

But you all knew that already.

imo 25% is way too high, personally I go with 5% or less, just keep some big chips handy and break it up at the table if needed.. Obviously you need to be extra nitty about topping off when fun players have you covered.

Do you guys go after small edges (such as betting river light) as much as being anal about how much you are below max BI?

Yup. Bet/fold for thin value greatly increases my hourly.

Sent from my LG-D801 using 2+2 Forums

Think Dickie was being rhetorical and snarky (as only Dickie can) lol.

in b4 Dickie claims to be 100% earnest.

What's the live 1/2nl equivalent of the online version of "a winning player can lose over 100K hands" 50K? Or can a winning player lose at live 1/2nl over a 100k hand sample size? tks.

A solid winner in a 1/2 game should not lose more than a couple of hundred hours in a row.

The numbers that are relevant are winrate and standard deviation of your results. You may never figure out a very precise winrate - but based on collective wisdom, 10 bb / hr is possible and very solid ($20/hr). Typical standard deviation for a 1/2 winner should be on the order of ~$120/hr or maybe a bit higher. Together, those numbers can give probability of downswing depth and duration. What almost everybody fails to account for when they decide "they run bad"... is they are typically not a disciplined $20/hr winner with $120/hr standard deviation. They are most likely a near breakeven player who uses stats from hot streaks in contrast to current cold streaks to (erroneously) deduce they run horrible.

Or more specific to your question... anyone breaking even over 10k~15k+ hands at live 1/2 should blame their play, not variance.

I just run bad.