Well, yeah, I think there might be something to this.

I had realized that I needed to open up my game a bit, and actually ran very well for a while doing this, then suddenly got overconfident I think.

Looking back on the hands, the plays themselves weren't obviously horrible, it was just not taking all the variables into account (i.e., bad move in that spot, against that Villain, with those stacks) trying to be objective of course, not results-oriented.

Plus some "agressive calls" which were just bad.

I mean I had some decent plays also like just shoving the river vs. a weak-tighty with WtSD<10, not repping much of anything, but counting on him to find a fold, which he did.

So who knows, maybe you just have to spew sometimes to figure out where the "right" mark is on the aggression meter.

I consider spew plays you make at a pot that based on the information provided had a very low percentage chance of success.

For example,
Three bet TT OOP
Get called
C-bet undercard flop
Get Called
Check / shove a turn bet that basically commited your opp.

At the time I did not stop and think before shoving the turn. Zomg, this guy is making a play at me... etc. Based on the size of his turn bet my shove was spew.

You must look at the information available to you at the time of your play. If you had good reason to believe the play would work it is not spew. Therefore, you should never spew.

IMO, The idea that a good aggresive player will spew every now and then is a cop out. You should make good decisions everytime, anything less is unacceptable.

My 2 cents.

anyone who believes that, either isnt using the same definition of spew as they should be, or is a poor player trying to justify their poor playing.

this is all obviously very definition based

If you are a decent winner with an AF > 3.5, then there's a fine line between well judged aggression and spew.

If your AF<2 then... if it looks like spew and feels like spew, it IS spew.

The point is to get really good, you need to experiment with just how aggressively you can push some bluff/ thin value bet boundaries - and it's easy to think (mistakenly) that means you are just spewing, when you may in fact be playing quite well but running bad.

But basically playing superaggro on tilt often = spew because you stopped bothering to calculate the chance a play will actually work, and you're randomly firing $s into pots more in hope than considered expectation.

If I don't know if it's spew or not I call it a razor thin value bet or an agressive call

From the luegofuego well (my emphasis):
If spew is the splashing around and making (possible) thin plays then I'm afraid I'm not doing it enough (e.g. raising nits on the river) - if it's the tilted one I'm not doing it, but I usually only play short sessions (< 2 hours).

i spew a pretty huge amount given my winrate
leads me to think that the metagame influence of spewing is bigger than people think

almost never for me..
nah.. maybe a few times a day, a buyin here, a buyin there, who's counting

read what i wrote then comment

i tilted for the first time in months today, -7 buyins and i'm done for the day

i don't spew very often but when I do I make sure I do it right

Agreed. spew = making clearly -ev plays

so true, sigh

"Tilt is simply the act of playing worse than you are capable of playing" "Tilt is not the same as bad play". (The poker mindset)

Yup..

and to all the people that never 'spew'...are u actually human? We all tilt sometimes.

What OP asks about is if a typical big 5PTBB/100 sample includes significant amounts of tilt. Maybe he is actually asking about how much a good winning player tilts, measured in PTBB/100.

I'd say tilt knocks off 2ptbb/100 off of my winrate.

Well here you go - I played a ridiculous number of hands at 100NL (mainly because I tilted so much, especially when moving up). My style is super duper nitty and very low variance, and the tilt is visible clear as day imo. I'd say 3PTBB/100 minimum just from the benders, without including all the intra-uptrend tilt.

Oh yeah, this NAILS it for me.... KING! Spew LOL

I won't lie and say I never spew, but after 1 or 2 "wtf where you thinking?!?" plays, I can recognize that I'm not playing my A-game and take a break.

Up to now I assumed you ware breaking even at best playing 20/11 - obviously not . Solid graph, solid 55k break-even stretch.

I like this thread. Seems everyone has a definition of spew. Mine is as follows.

Say the best player ever at $100 BI NL 6 handed can make between 20-30 PTBB/100 hands. He's able to do this long term because he is incredibly focused, knows all the plays and picks the best one on all situations, he never plays weak, never tilts and never spews. This person does not exist in reality, but maybe he does in potential.

Now, let's say my potential top end earn is 10 PTBB/100 based on my knowledge of the game. If my winrate is 5 PTBB/100, then I'm losing the other 5 PTBB/100 because of things that I can immediately control... weak play, spew, tilt. With these numbers, I'd say weak play accounts for about 1PTBB/100, tilt 2PTBB/100 and spew 2PTBB/100.

Now, if I want my potential winrate to go higher than 10PTBB/100, I need to learn new plays, find ways to optimize my strats against specific types of opponents, basically increase my knowledge base. Let's say I study for a week and come back with new knowledge and a potential top end earn of 12PTBB/100.

If I still carry the same amount of weak play, tilt and spew that I did before (which I would if I haven't worked on this area of my game at all), then I'm only going to see an actual increase to 6PTBB/100 instead of a bump to 7PTBB/100. Even though my knowledge gain was 2PTBB/100, my actual results were cut in half because I suck at discipline.

Seems to me I'd do better in the long run if I focused on eliminating tilt/weakness/spew from my game before watching more videos and posting more hands, etc.

If only I was a purely logical being. Dang emotions!

soda

Plz to be esplaining ur maths?

Get rich or spew tryin.