Smallish sample or not, why are you guys trying to break this man down? It's like all of you want everyone to be some humble sheep even at a time when they should be able to enjoy an extreme amount of pride in their results. **** the ego-less hater's OP. Take pride in your accomplishment and enjoy the joy and confidence it should bring.

Because OP hasn't posted anything remotely interesting. It's just a weak brag thread. Either he'll carry on crushing on the way up, or he'll learn that this thread was silly.

Take it to BBV.

Sample is just way to small and basically means nothing

I'm gonna be a little sad if this wasn't an attempt at the best troll post ITT.

Because if so, you win uncontested.

word

haters*

ignore the haters OP, 30bb/100 at 4 table 25nl zoom you could be earning $75 an hour... I'd quit your job now and take up full time poker

I troll occasionally when I think something is just ******ed but this isn't one of them. I also think it's kind of silly to brag in a strat forum over a small sample, but to totally beat up on someone who's probably feeling pride for the first time in his poker career is just wrong.

Like anything in life it takes a strong ego, confidence, and pride to be successful. When that happens and someone most likely without a lot of poker experience starts to experience that it should be embraced and encouraged not shot down.

That most members choose to do the latter ultimately shows their character.

You'd need a fragile ego and low confidence to consider this thread "beating up".

Because OP is likely going to understand and persevere with poker long term if he realises that 10k hands is not enough to eliminate variance (where the actual number is more like 750k-1mil) rather than finally hitting his downswing and quitting because it's "rigged".

Patting him on the back and congratulating him is going to do nothing but make his eventual downswing hurt more. If anything, you're the one being a bad person here.

I give up.

Do you disagree with what I countered with?

Cry more.

Damn you all are haters! I know it's a small sample size! All I wanted to do was play two 10k samples of with two different playing styles to see which one I was more successful with. In any case I crushed playing both, and my non showdown win rate is really good. Can anybody confirm that they actually saw my graphs?

Even if your non showdown rate is really good, it doesn't mean your play isn't subject to variance. You can just hit hands all the time while your opponents never hit or most of the time when you bluff your opponents don't have hands which would make your non showdown winnings go up. Sample size is still small and 30bb is not sustainable at 25NL for sure, so you clearly are on a heater. That's not to say you're not a winner at those stakes, you may be, but you can't tell from this sample size.

I wouldn't call that the doom switch. You are obviously a bad ass winning close to 13bb over 60,000 hands @ $100NL! It looks to me like you were running above your all in EV and then ran below all in EV.

In anycase you have a great style!! The win rate of your show down winnings and non showdown winnings are almost exactly the same slope. That is really hard to achieve and you play with a really balanced style. I like it!!

^+1

I feel like you're kind of missing the point here. Granted, most of the responses haven't been entirely serious, but what we're trying to tell you is really important to your future in the game. Both of these samples are almost entirely insignificant. I'm not saying you didn't play well, but variance can and will affect your results drastically, even over a sample as large as 100k hands. Unless you play samples greater than this size with both playing styles, your results won't tell you anything at all about which style is more successful for you.

I also feel like you're just looking for recognition and a pat on the back for being an amazing player. Nobody here wants to read a thinly veiled brag thread (this is why the BBV forum exists). Your graphs are pretty sick, I won't lie, but they have very little correlation with your actual abilities as a player. I'm sorry, but all your graphs can really tell you is that you ran amazingly for this stretch of hands.

EDIT: +1 on adriang

I never said no varince, I said almost no varince. And together this was 20k hands and that is much more significant in showing that I can be very successful playing multiple styles.

And what I mean by almost no variance is that my green has almost no siwngs in it over the 20k hands

You clearly do not understand what variance is.

Poker players should love the central limit theorem. it dictates that if you get enough play you should get pretty close to your expected results. Although some deviation will occur between the observed win and theoretical win.this deviation should be small when the number of trials is large. if the number of trials is small however, a substantial difference may exist between the actual and the expected win

Let's put it this way: I play some hands and get it in bad constantly but I get lucky and win every single time. My green line is going to up and won't have any swings right ? Does that mean there was no variance in my play ?

I never said no variance. And if you even looked you would know that 90% of my winnings came from non-showdown hands. That means that I wasn't getting it in bad and winning every single time, it means that the got the other players to fold and never had a chance to get lucky.....

[ ] OP is Serious
[ ] Those are OP's graphs.

pick one, can't be both.

OP is confirmed brick wall.

Actually it's not the number of hands that's most important in determining weather or not your sample means anything. It's the standard deviation of BB won per 100 hands that you can use to develop confidence intervals that tell you what range your win rate should be in 95% of the time over a specified # of hands.