Played a fairly long session (for me) yesterday and finished up just over 3 buyins which is a good result of course. The main reason the session was a long one was that for a middle period of almost 1,500 hands I was getting run over and went from 2 1/2 buyins up to 5 buyins down. Run over is probably the wrong term but basically I was playing bad calling stations and I couldn't hit a damn thing and they could not miss. The rare times I actually hit a pair they would river two pair+, we have been there, so whatever. As they were stations I couldn't even double barrell them off of their weak hands which were destined to outdraw me always.
My main question is whether I was right to stick in these games. At 3 tables I barely won a single pot bar a few tiny wons and lost all the medium and big pots to coolers. Although the opposition was weak should I be quitting these games when all the momentum is with them and not me? As an important side issue of this; as I was not showing down any decent winning hands they were more inclined to call my bets on the end as my table image sucked big time, so river bluffs were -EV too.
On the flip side when I am hitting some hands my opponents get pinned to the 100BB stack they start with (assuming they reload) and cannot get anything going against me as I have the momentum. This allows me to make more plays, be more aggressive, bluff closer to omptimum and value bet thinner.
In the end all 3 games broke with the fishies walking away with a nice tidy profit so I was forced to switch tables and eventually ran well enough at a few of them to recover.
How long do other players stay at a table when they are completely cold decked? At what point, if any, do you just say to yourself "this isn't going to turn for me I need to switch". Is it the 2nd of 3rd time they hit their less than 5 outer in a row? Before that? Later?
Don't let that deter you from playing in the games but you should only consider leaving if you're not playing your A game .
If you believe that the momentum is on their side , then it can alter your psyche which will prevent you from being at your best . It really is a judgement call .
Momemtum is NOT a myth insofar as people tend to play differently/worse as they lose. Some people become calling stations, some people get over-aggro trying to win their money back. If you can recognize what changes are occuring, then you can use it to your advantage.
Jay I do not accept that momemtum does not exist at all. I have used it to my advantage on several occasions either by being ruthlessly aggressive or trapping my opponent into making big mistakes (bluff inducing etc). Also Whilst I had to play more passive and straightforawrd against the players when down, it was entirely due to them being calling stations with any part and my inabilty to flop anything even half decent. Altering my own psyche made not a blind bit of difference to how the cards fell or my inability to get in +EV spots post flop.
AbreuTime, something I am still struggling with is how to minimish my losses in sessions like this. I do tend to bluff too much or overvalue my hands when running stone cold. I am not a spew monkey but there is plenty of room for improvement for sure. Unfortuantely there is no place to hide when running bad HU you are going to lose a good few $s whatever you do.
this reminds me of when doyle wrote something about how mathematicians don't believe in rushes but yet [rushes] still pay his bills or something.
insofar as people will adjust in response to "momentum" i don't think that the cause of the adjustment (when it's so closely tied to variance) is important so much as how they adjust (and how we should re-adjust).
if villain adjusts in response to something you are in control of, then it's good to know the cause so you can always stay ahead. if villain is adjusting because they're getting run over, it's not really important as long as we know how to take advantage of the changes they make. if villain has the momentum, it shouldn't matter at all as long as we're playing well against their current style (be it affected by their momentum or not).
Momentum may exist but then this perceived momentum shift is the recognition that your opponent's strategy is being affected more towards optimal play. Momentum in your example may simply mean that players who you consider more skilled than are now playing more optimally and/or you are not playing optimally. If this is the case and the fish now has an edge due to the perceived change in play, then yes you should quit. If they are still making identifiably weak plays then no you should not quit, but adapt.
Momentum may exist but then this perceived momentum shift is the recognition that your opponent's strategy is being affected more towards optimal play. Momentum in your example may simply mean that players who you consider more skilled than are now playing more optimally and/or you are not playing optimally. If this is the case and the fish now has an edge due to the perceived change in play, then yes you should quit. If they are still making identifiably weak plays then no you should not quit, but adapt.
