Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Winrates, bankrolls, and finances Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
Two Plus Two Forums
[OFFICIAL] Winrates, bankrolls, and finances

11-29-2014 , 08:50 PM
Biggest factors to my 21-bi downswing were

Accumulated tilt
playing like a hero
not being good at poker
No patience

I think that's everyone's problem
11-29-2014 , 09:04 PM
I've been slightly above break even for the last 50-100 hours and I'd say various rearrangements of Duke's list pretty much nail it.

I think it's pretty tough for all of a 20BI downswing to be variance simply because by the time you're halfway there, you're likely to start contributing to the problem on your own.
11-29-2014 , 10:38 PM
Snowball's smart.

Current winners think they can use their tiny sample size of a few thousand hours or whatever and then extrapolate it. It doesn't work that way. You'd need way more
hands in order to try something like that.

They also think whoever busted their roll or chose to stop playing for whatever reason just wasn't good enough to win.

unless all your pals are 40 year vets, you just don't have a big enough sample size to draw any hard conclusions (other than you're a winner)
11-29-2014 , 10:44 PM
Discussion has gone full ******
11-29-2014 , 10:49 PM
100k hour sample or gtfo.

Everyone that went broke was running bad and had zero leaks (obviously).
11-29-2014 , 10:49 PM
No kidding.
11-29-2014 , 10:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobFarha Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
100k hour sample or gtfo.

Everyone that went broke was running bad and had zero leaks (obviously).


Sent from my LG-D855 using 2+2 Forums
11-29-2014 , 10:53 PM
How do I know if i suck at the poker and am just on a lifetime heater?
11-29-2014 , 10:57 PM
You don't, unless you have tracked a million hands.
11-29-2014 , 11:05 PM
Coming from online where a 50-100k hand sample (one month of play) isn't hard data, or even an entire year isn't enough... I think it's funny to see live players think a few thousand hours is large enough to make predictions or even generalizations about all live players swings

but you guys can think whatever you want. I didn't mean to bruise anyones ego. All of you are crushers who will never go on a downswing. Ever. I'd tell you good luck but you guys obviously don't need it
11-29-2014 , 11:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siculamente Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
Coming from online where a 50-100k hand sample (one month of play) isn't hard data, or even an entire year isn't enough... I think it's funny to see live players think a few thousand hours is large enough to make predictions or even generalizations about all live players swings

but you guys can think whatever you want. I didn't mean to bruise anyones ego. All of you are crushers who will never go on a downswing. Ever. I'd tell you good luck but you guys obviously don't need it
Then you should also know that the variance in onlinegames where people mass multitabling with often razorthin edges is something very different.

I often play with an experienced reg who plays usually 2 games every week. Between 10 and 20 hours pr week on average,little more on holidays and so on. He has done this for more than 10 years straight now and is winning in the game every single year.

Do you want me to tell him that he dont have a large enough samplesize to predict if he is a winning player and that the downswing of his life is just around the corner? I mean are you serious?

Sent from my LG-D855 using 2+2 Forums
11-29-2014 , 11:18 PM
Sorry. I'm just a live fish. I'll let y'all git back to yer discussion
11-29-2014 , 11:30 PM
Live /= online so trying to compare winrates and results is pointless. So all we can go off of experiences of winning players.

I will say I think mtt variance will never be overcome live simply due to the top heavy nature of them.
11-30-2014 , 12:17 AM
I remember reading somewhere that 50K hand breakeven stretch online for winning players happen a fair amount of the time. Something like once or twice per year in 200nl or 400nl. That is pretty striking to me since to me, this means 50K hand as a sample size is somewhat unreliable.
11-30-2014 , 12:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallelflux Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
I remember reading somewhere that 50K hand breakeven stretch online for winning players happen a fair amount of the time. Something like once or twice per year in 200nl or 400nl. That is pretty striking to me since to me, this means 50K hand as a sample size is somewhat unreliable.
Variance is correlated to bb/100 so 50k is very reliable live if you are winning 30bb/100
11-30-2014 , 12:30 AM
I will lay 500-1 that I won't have a losing year in the next five years if anyone wants to book.
11-30-2014 , 06:31 AM
Lol how much action are you willing to take? Sounds like a terrible proposition for you.
11-30-2014 , 08:37 AM
I'll take action up to 50 million of exposure from my side.

Lol, on a more serious and practical note if someone did seriously want to bet me on say me having a losing year next year I would be willing to negotiate odds.

When I posted that I wasn't really considering the practicality of having money escrowed for years and considering the fact that if I won the main event I would quit poker.
11-30-2014 , 09:30 AM
I know at least 1 strong big winner Vegas 2/5 NL pro who has had a 5-figure downswing at strictly 2/5 NL in the recent past.

In LA, I know several strong pros who have had several 2000bb+ downswings in their careers (I hate measuring downswings in terms of buyins...big blinds is much more accurate).

With that said, the vast majority of people are just lighting money on fire when they have a downswing (and they whine abiut the bad luck knstead of owning up to the bad play). So it is way too hard to know if you are running horribly or just playing horribly unless you are a very self-aware poker player who is brutally honest with yourself.
11-30-2014 , 09:54 AM
I'm up lots of bbs this year, but down money so, haha. I've definitely had 5 fig swings both ways at 2/5. Not quite 1/2 but def have lost 5k+ at 1/2 (though deep), so I think 20 bi can be a bit shallow if you buyin deep or don't move down.

I've decided to move to a 40bi brm since I have to pay rent and stuff. Makes me sad.

Bad runs definitely can happen but as said it clouds judgement and to a great degree bad play and bad luck do come hand in hand.
11-30-2014 , 12:58 PM
My game is 500 cap. I take nothing from my roll. I har unlimited access to deep and pitifully soft 1/2 so my risk is basically zero. Hence the 20bi requirement.

I can say that I'm still getting used to the amounts. I do flinch a bit when I stack off and lose. Mostly, that's just a temporary issue while I grow accustomed o the bigger pot sizes. I'm not really concerned with the actual loss since I'm not currently pullin from that roll anyway. I have yet to have a big winner a 2/5. That'll fix a lot of te mental issues I think.
11-30-2014 , 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spikeraw22 Winrates, bankrolls, and finances
My game is 500 cap. I take nothing from my roll. I har unlimited access to deep and pitifully soft 1/2 so my risk is basically zero. Hence the 20bi requirement.

I can say that I'm still getting used to the amounts. I do flinch a bit when I stack off and lose. Mostly, that's just a temporary issue while I grow accustomed o the bigger pot sizes. I'm not really concerned with the actual loss since I'm not currently pullin from that roll anyway. I have yet to have a big winner a 2/5. That'll fix a lot of te mental issues I think.

Yeah, I actually dropped down from 2/5 back to 1/2-1/3 because I just felt so uncomfortable pulling the trigger in spots I know I should and feeling like the world was over when I had a ****ty session and this was with a 30bi roll.
11-30-2014 , 06:20 PM
Im down money as well this year with over 1k hours in volume (coming off a huge downswing at the end of 2013 too that i didnt include). 500:1 is in your favor at 2/5 assuming you will DEFINITELY play like 2000 hours (i mean thats only a bit more than 3 standard deviations of runbad), but then again if you've never experienced losing over the first 1000 hours you might lose motivation to grind out the rest and get back to positive, so it's a tossup at those odds imo
11-30-2014 , 06:28 PM
Literally like 90%+ of the best players running the best that I know have had a couple hundred hours and like 600bb downswings at a bare minimum at 2/5 levels- again, these are the guys who play great *and* run great, like do you know any long-time players who havent even experienced that? So... If these are the guys that run like god, then it shouldnt be that much of a stretch to imagine guys who are ACTUALLY running badly and maybe only slightly worse at poker but still very solid winners to have downswings over 3x worse than that.

Last edited by Aesah; 11-30-2014 at 06:39 PM.
11-30-2014 , 08:51 PM
so I've logged 850 total hours since downloading pokerjournal, and my biggest downswing is 6k at 2/5, and at least half of that was tilt

you guys are saying that I can expect to lose a lot more at some time in the future and it will be standard?

      
m