Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Live No-Limit Hold’em Cash Discussion of no-limit hold’em live cash games of all stakes.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-25-2013, 12:30 PM   #5451
kb coolman
Pooh-Bah
 
kb coolman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: must...not...feed...trolls
Posts: 5,452
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by 11t View Post
To blame variance is not the same as to accept it, by accepting it you can learn to overcome it whereas blame turns it into a scape goat.
This is exactly what i meant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sauhund View Post
yeah, i agree with that statement.
i think i actually misunderstood you, didnt want to sound like a dick. i just feel that really a lot of players underestimate short-term variance, and especially long term/short term differentiation. 20 sessions of live poker is not long term by any means imo.

We're on the same page.

Group hug guys.
kb coolman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 01:41 PM   #5452
Pay4Myschool
Haz Chuck Norris 4 Dad
 
Pay4Myschool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Michigan / California
Posts: 7,473
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATsai View Post
Pretty pointless to debate exactly how much variance or bad play affects our bottom line results.

I would personally assume that my own skills have a 75% effect on my results versus luck having a 25% effect on my results just because I like to "train" myself into taking personal responsibility for my results.

I really have no idea what effect variance really had, but I do know that there is no downside to taking personal responsibility for my own results. By assuming that I control at least 75% of my own results with my own play, I set myself up for success by focusing on playing my A+ game without worrying about how good/bad I am running luck-wise.
This right here is why you are one of my most respected posters in the forums
Pay4Myschool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 03:39 PM   #5453
Avaritia
Confirmed 2500 hour haver
 
Avaritia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 12,215
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Just to chime in, the whole online vs live lol sample size variance etc etc debate has some flaws.

Yes online you experience hundreds of thousands of hands and thus your play approaches a "normal" distribution (this includes your variance over said six figure hand sample size).

But online you are playing against sophisticated players who understand poker theory and strategy, you are 6betting pf when you are 51/49 vs an opponents range. Because you are working with razor thin edges, you need a vast sample to negate variance and understand your true wr.

But in live you play most poker post flop against total droolers. An intelligent player's wr should be mainly determined in turn and river play imo, I know mine is. So while in live we have a much smaller sample to work with, we have much larger edges. Alot of my opponents are willing to put their stack in ott with a non nut bare flush draw. It's hard, even for variance, to keep us in downswing if we are maximizing 80/20 edges all the time. Obviously be stretches are possible over a few hundred hours bc yes a few bad sessions at a great table can dent your wr, but I think a lot of downswing is human error, not variance.

The idea that "you never really will know if you're truly a live winning player bc sample will never be large enough" is flawed for this reason. In live play we are maximizing substantial edges.
Avaritia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 04:06 PM   #5454
kb coolman
Pooh-Bah
 
kb coolman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: must...not...feed...trolls
Posts: 5,452
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
But in live you play most poker post flop against total droolers. An intelligent player's wr should be mainly determined in turn and river play imo, I know mine is. So while in live we have a much smaller sample to work with, we have much larger edges. Alot of my opponents are willing to put their stack in ott with a non nut bare flush draw. It's hard, even for variance, to keep us in downswing if we are maximizing 80/20 edges all the time. Obviously be stretches are possible over a few hundred hours bc yes a few bad sessions at a great table can dent your wr, but I think a lot of downswing is human error, not variance.
kb coolman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 04:27 PM   #5455
Angrist
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,883
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
I think a lot of downswing is human error, not variance.
Amen to all of that. Especially the quoted.

If you can point to 5 hands where you lost 200bb+ getting it in good ... Ok, that's variance.

Most live downswings don't seem to run that way though, it's the "damnit they always have the goods" type hands that kill you, and it's because you screwed up somewhere in the hand. Either by poor ranging, or poor bet sizing, or *something* that put you in spot where you're way behind and don't realize it.
Angrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 04:38 PM   #5456
11t
Bo Pelini's #1 Fan
 
11t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewville
Posts: 31,421
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

I don't know why but **** like what has been posted seems so delusional to me, it is like Phil Hellmuth saying "if it wasn't for luck I'd win every hand!"

I'm all for damn the torpedos and focusing on playing your best but we are human, we will make mistakes (which is built into our winrate) but you will run worse than you ever thought was possible while playing as good as you can.
11t is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 04:39 PM   #5457
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,366
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
Just to chime in, the whole online vs live lol sample size variance etc etc debate has some flaws.

Yes online you experience hundreds of thousands of hands and thus your play approaches a "normal" distribution (this includes your variance over said six figure hand sample size).

But online you are playing against sophisticated players who understand poker theory and strategy, you are 6betting pf when you are 51/49 vs an opponents range. Because you are working with razor thin edges, you need a vast sample to negate variance and understand your true wr.

But in live you play most poker post flop against total droolers. An intelligent player's wr should be mainly determined in turn and river play imo, I know mine is. So while in live we have a much smaller sample to work with, we have much larger edges. Alot of my opponents are willing to put their stack in ott with a non nut bare flush draw. It's hard, even for variance, to keep us in downswing if we are maximizing 80/20 edges all the time. Obviously be stretches are possible over a few hundred hours bc yes a few bad sessions at a great table can dent your wr, but I think a lot of downswing is human error, not variance.

The idea that "you never really will know if you're truly a live winning player bc sample will never be large enough" is flawed for this reason. In live play we are maximizing substantial edges.
I think I'm beginning to finally coming around to agreeing with this. And yet at the same time, I still think I'm being results oriented over a lol sample size.

ETA: In the end, it all boils down to one extremely simple thing: table selection. Against droolers where we can simply patiently wait for huge edges before getting it in and passing on the small edges, we'll probably typically crush fairly safely. As soon as you remove those droolers from the table, not so much.

ETA#2: I've just realized I had a very similar discussion (re: table selection) about our hockey team in the dressing room after our game last night. Our opponents, who literally could barely skate at the beginning of the season (but had good puck handling, passing and shooting skills thanks to a ballhockey background) have now learned to skate; so while we beat them quite handily early in the season, they beat us quite soundly last night (game was closer than it should have been thanks to our goalie *brag*). Anyhooooooo, everyone is sitting around our dressing room thinking what they could have done better in order to make this game more competitive, as well as all the other games (we're getting soundily drubbed most games). All I could do was laugh. We're 20+ years older than most teams. Every other team has at least one hotshot (we have none). The other teams have some real shooters (we don't). The other teams have legitimate defenseman (we lost our only one before the season started). The other teams play smarter hockey. They are more skilled overall in the basics (taking a pass, making a pass, being aware, etc.). And yet our team is still under the illusion that we can compete if we just tweaked a few things here and there, or this guy hadda shown up, or this, or that. Lol. They just can't quite grasp that: we're sitting a freaking awful table and have no long term chance of competing succesfully on a game to game basis. My teammates would be awesome to have at the poker table $$$ earning-wise as they have every attribute of a losing poker player (delusional, no awareness of where they actually sit in the food chain, "Hey, I won one! I can do that every night! Turns out I am good and can compete!", etc.). /rant (frustrating and rather unenjoyable summer hockey season, playoff beard is being trimmed in next night or two)


Gcuemassivedoomswitch?G

Last edited by gobbledygeek; 07-25-2013 at 04:53 PM.
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 06:23 PM   #5458
sauhund
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: osiasgriffin
Posts: 5,846
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by 11t View Post
I don't know why but **** like what has been posted seems so delusional to me, it is like Phil Hellmuth saying "if it wasn't for luck I'd win every hand!"

I'm all for damn the torpedos and focusing on playing your best but we are human, we will make mistakes (which is built into our winrate) but you will run worse than you ever thought was possible while playing as good as you can.
yeah, +1. the long run is long, longer than most of you are seeming to realize.
it can be a sick game from time to time...
i know i´m an online player primarily, and maybe some of you won´t take my statements seriously, but i believe after all these hands i feel like i am a seasoned grizzled veteran. believe me, poker variance can be absurd.
sauhund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 10:34 PM   #5459
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turyia View Post
someone posited 30 hph recently as typical and no one corrected him... youre right though, it is high.
I counted an average of 32/hr all over the strip in Vegas for a three week period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by squid face View Post
Calling you out o. This 1 sir simply do not believe your statement that a top online grinder was b/e for 600k hands. I have played a ton online and live and know many online crushers none of whom ever went more than 50k break even. This encompasses an extremely large sample size of players and hands played. These are true crushers w/r greater than 3BB/100 online
600k live seems like it'd be a 15 year break even stretch, lol. Online, plenty of solid winning regs have had 100k B/E stretches, and I have heard of worse, fwiw.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 12:54 AM   #5460
squid face
ChatThreadPrez
 
squid face's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: grabbin c-notes from the money tree
Posts: 10,246
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpethybridge View Post
I counted an average of 32/hr all over the strip in Vegas for a three week period.



600k live seems like it'd be a 15 year break even stretch, lol. Online, plenty of solid winning regs have had 100k B/E stretches, and I have heard of worse, fwiw.
as the master of evaluating hem dbases I value your opinion greatly in this matter. I was simply calling out the OP on his pal being the top crusher and breaking even for 600k hands. I know good players that b/e for 100k hands, My point was I know true crushers 3BB+wr (not 3bb I am talking 3PTBB) and none of them was b/e for more than 50k over quite large samples
squid face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 04:27 AM   #5461
mpethybridge
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
mpethybridge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 86.4% dead, most likely
Posts: 16,997
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by squid face View Post
as the master of evaluating hem dbases I value your opinion greatly in this matter. I was simply calling out the OP on his pal being the top crusher and breaking even for 600k hands. I know good players that b/e for 100k hands, My point was I know true crushers 3BB+wr (not 3bb I am talking 3PTBB) and none of them was b/e for more than 50k over quite large samples
Yeah, we're not disagreeing on anything important.
mpethybridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 06:51 AM   #5462
Gilmour
Pooh-Bah
 
Gilmour's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Norway
Posts: 3,930
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avaritia View Post
Just to chime in, the whole online vs live lol sample size variance etc etc debate has some flaws.

Yes online you experience hundreds of thousands of hands and thus your play approaches a "normal" distribution (this includes your variance over said six figure hand sample size).

But online you are playing against sophisticated players who understand poker theory and strategy, you are 6betting pf when you are 51/49 vs an opponents range. Because you are working with razor thin edges, you need a vast sample to negate variance and understand your true wr.

But in live you play most poker post flop against total droolers. An intelligent player's wr should be mainly determined in turn and river play imo, I know mine is. So while in live we have a much smaller sample to work with, we have much larger edges. Alot of my opponents are willing to put their stack in ott with a non nut bare flush draw. It's hard, even for variance, to keep us in downswing if we are maximizing 80/20 edges all the time. Obviously be stretches are possible over a few hundred hours bc yes a few bad sessions at a great table can dent your wr, but I think a lot of downswing is human error, not variance.

The idea that "you never really will know if you're truly a live winning player bc sample will never be large enough" is flawed for this reason. In live play we are maximizing substantial edges.

Amazing post Avarita. Some of the best and well written stuff i have been reading in a long time.
Gilmour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 01:35 PM   #5463
Raidion
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: on the streets
Posts: 588
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

The trick live is to just know when to get away from a hand. If you can lay an overpair and TPTK down and also not cbet spew the majority of my losses other than those come from variance. Live you just need to bet/fold a whole ton and give people a lot of credit until proved otherwise.

I've had two 6BI downswings and one 7BI downswing at 1/2 over 400 hours this year and have a winrate >$10 an hour. I make at least over $30+ worth of mistakes each session and only get honestly coolered rarely (how common is set over set?). If you aren't winning over a long run >100 hours, it's your play, not your variance.
Raidion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:28 PM   #5464
cbayly12
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raidion View Post
The trick live is to just know when to get away from a hand. If you can lay an overpair and TPTK down and also not cbet spew the majority of my losses other than those come from variance. Live you just need to bet/fold a whole ton and give people a lot of credit until proved otherwise.

I've had two 6BI downswings and one 7BI downswing at 1/2 over 400 hours this year and have a winrate >$10 an hour. I make at least over $30+ worth of mistakes each session and only get honestly coolered rarely (how common is set over set?). If you aren't winning over a long run >100 hours, it's your play, not your variance.
You clearly don't understand what the long run is. 100 hour downswings are pretty common. I play about 1400-1500 hours a year and experience atleast one 100 hour downswing each year it seems, and I am probably one of the best regs in my room. I've been on a 4-500 hour breakeven stretch which felt like torture.
cbayly12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:33 PM   #5465
cbayly12
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 884




Notice the current stretch I'm on. Been breakeven ( down 5k ) for about 150 hours so far. Notice the one earlier in the graph with was like down (10k) over ~400 hours.
cbayly12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:37 PM   #5466
gobbledygeek
Poet Laureate of LLSNL
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 33,366
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

^^^^ nice graph and winrate dude!

2/5 NL I'm guessing?

Two interesting things I noticed were (a) small session winrate and (b) small session length (~3 hrs), with I'm guessing the latter affecting the former.

GkeepcrushingG
gobbledygeek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:41 PM   #5467
Neutrogena
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 462
How is there such discrepancy between average BI and average total rebuy?
Neutrogena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:48 PM   #5468
cbayly12
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neutrogena View Post
How is there such discrepancy between average BI and average total rebuy?
My game plays uncapped, so when I first started playing in the game id buy in for about 100bbs ($500). For the last year to year and a half I generally just cover the table and sit with 2-3k. Don't really rebuy too often. If I get stacked I'm usually done.

But if I do rebuy I just edit the session and add it on to the original buy in. Maybe that's the reason? Don't really know. I live a block or two from my casino, so I play multiple short sessions per day (3-4 hours).
cbayly12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 04:06 PM   #5469
Neutrogena
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 462
The numbers don't jive is all.

I don't really have any particular use for these numbers other than comparison purposes.
Neutrogena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 04:11 PM   #5470
cbayly12
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neutrogena View Post
The numbers don't jive is all.

I don't really have any particular use for these numbers other than comparison purposes.
Also keep in mind that the rebuy number is the number during winning sessions. Generally I don't rebuy during winning sessions (since I play short sessions).



Maybe these numbers help you. I would consider myself a very detailed recorder of my data, so you can feel confident that these numbers are legit. But again, I generally don't get stacked since I usually have everyone covered, so I seldom have to make a full rebuy, so these numbers would reflect me topping up and covering everyone. Generally I just pull another $500 chip out of my pocket and add on.
cbayly12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2013, 12:33 AM   #5471
AsnG
centurion
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Any Form of Gambling
Posts: 137
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

hey cbayly, how long for 882 sessions?
AsnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2013, 12:49 AM   #5472
Neutrogena
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbayly12 View Post
Also keep in mind that the rebuy number is the number during winning sessions. Generally I don't rebuy during winning sessions (since I play short sessions).



Maybe these numbers help you. I would consider myself a very detailed recorder of my data, so you can feel confident that these numbers are legit. But again, I generally don't get stacked since I usually have everyone covered, so I seldom have to make a full rebuy, so these numbers would reflect me topping up and covering everyone. Generally I just pull another $500 chip out of my pocket and add on.
Actually your number will always be very different than most numbers posted here.

1. It is uncapped.

2. You do not keep an accurate record of your starting stack and rebuy amount.

3. It appears that you hit and run quite a bit, perhaps to play one giant pot per session against a target, then you cash out.
Neutrogena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2013, 01:36 AM   #5473
cbayly12
banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neutrogena View Post
Actually your number will always be very different than most numbers posted here.

1. It is uncapped.

2. You do not keep an accurate record of your starting stack and rebuy amount.

3. It appears that you hit and run quite a bit, perhaps to play one giant pot per session against a target, then you cash out.
1) Correct, game is uncapped.

2) I do keep an accurate record of buy in amounts, but if I don't lose chips and a whale doubles and I top off I add it to my buy in, since I don't really consider it a rebuy. If I lose a pot and top off I enter data as a rebuy. Not sure if that is standard, just makes the most sense to me?

3) I certainly don't hit and run. I just live across the street from my room, so if game is bad, I'm tired, I'm hungry, I'm antsy, or stuck a ton I just get up and come back later. When winning I generally play longer.
cbayly12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2013, 01:47 AM   #5474
Neutrogena
grinder
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 462
1 and 2 kind of go together then.

3 is just an observation because your average session length is less than 3 hours.
Neutrogena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2013, 05:12 AM   #5475
bstillmatic
journeyman
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 292
re: Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raidion View Post
The trick live is to just know when to get away from a hand. If you can lay an overpair and TPTK down and also not cbet spew the majority of my losses other than those come from variance. Live you just need to bet/fold a whole ton and give people a lot of credit until proved otherwise.

I've had two 6BI downswings and one 7BI downswing at 1/2 over 400 hours this year and have a winrate >$10 an hour. I make at least over $30+ worth of mistakes each session and only get honestly coolered rarely (how common is set over set?). If you aren't winning over a long run >100 hours, it's your play, not your variance.
Against unknown villains what do you do with overpairs and TPTK when they raise your cbet on dry rainbow flops where their range is weighted to top pair..u recommend folding anyway until proven otherwise? tks.
bstillmatic is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive