BDD Hits A Wall
May. 26th, 2005 02:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksMr Dowling's absence from the online blog scene for a couple of weeks is perhaps partially explained by the fact that he can take a 24K hit and treat the matter philosophically. It does at least put any losses that I might incur into perspective.
Of course, BDD plays a swingy style in a swingy game, so this kind of thing can be expected once a year or so, but I certainly couldn't take it. Three or four bad sessions on the spin and I start doubting my ability to ever win a hand again.
That's the good thing about limit, in that the bad runs tend to last less long, because there are fewer massive hands and a lot more less-than-massive hands. I could see BDD's loss being down to, say, 12 coin-flips of which 10 went wrong. That kind of thing happens all the time.
In limit, even at, say, 50-100, such a run would only result in a loss of about 5K (I would guess). And it would be over in a couple of nights, because those coin-flips appear all the time. If you wait at limit until you are 80-20 favourite (as some players seem to do) then you will lose money slowly and surely.
I've had two good nights and one bad night since the "new strategy" came into play. Far too small a sample size to come to any conclusions about whether it is better or worse than the old one. But it feels better. However, one downside might be that I might have to move tables a bit more often, because the more aware players are likely to spot what line I am taking. As I said, the target is to win a significantly higher percentage of hands when I see the flop, even at the expense of winning fewer showdowns.
I don't think that I need to spell out the implications this has for my "style" and how it will inevitably lead to me being called down more often by "aware" players. The escape route here is to keep on the move if you think that someone has sussed you out. Luckily, Party has a big player base.
But this is a bit of a disadvantage. Before, I think that I gained a greater advantage from knowing about someone else's style than they gained from knowing about mine. At the moment, this might not be the case.
And, before you write in, the obvious answer is to know when to switch styles, and to be able to do so smoothly! By the time I've mastered that, I'll probably be ready to move up another level.
Of course, BDD plays a swingy style in a swingy game, so this kind of thing can be expected once a year or so, but I certainly couldn't take it. Three or four bad sessions on the spin and I start doubting my ability to ever win a hand again.
That's the good thing about limit, in that the bad runs tend to last less long, because there are fewer massive hands and a lot more less-than-massive hands. I could see BDD's loss being down to, say, 12 coin-flips of which 10 went wrong. That kind of thing happens all the time.
In limit, even at, say, 50-100, such a run would only result in a loss of about 5K (I would guess). And it would be over in a couple of nights, because those coin-flips appear all the time. If you wait at limit until you are 80-20 favourite (as some players seem to do) then you will lose money slowly and surely.
I've had two good nights and one bad night since the "new strategy" came into play. Far too small a sample size to come to any conclusions about whether it is better or worse than the old one. But it feels better. However, one downside might be that I might have to move tables a bit more often, because the more aware players are likely to spot what line I am taking. As I said, the target is to win a significantly higher percentage of hands when I see the flop, even at the expense of winning fewer showdowns.
I don't think that I need to spell out the implications this has for my "style" and how it will inevitably lead to me being called down more often by "aware" players. The escape route here is to keep on the move if you think that someone has sussed you out. Luckily, Party has a big player base.
But this is a bit of a disadvantage. Before, I think that I gained a greater advantage from knowing about someone else's style than they gained from knowing about mine. At the moment, this might not be the case.
And, before you write in, the obvious answer is to know when to switch styles, and to be able to do so smoothly! By the time I've mastered that, I'll probably be ready to move up another level.
Nice to see my name in lights!
Date: 2005-05-26 09:22 pm (UTC)If you can't do the time, dont do the crime. I always expected a bad run to come up, I just didnt expect it to happen in exactly the same month as last time.
As to the bad runs in limit, I think you may be mistaken. I remember when I used to frequent the limit forums on 2+2, that talks of 300-400 BB losses were fairly common. Both games are full of variance, which is why they last while others fade into extinction.
gl
dd
Re: Nice to see my name in lights!
Date: 2005-05-26 09:34 pm (UTC)It's amazing how my yearly charts also seem to follow similar patterns throughout the year. Odd.
I can see a 400BB swing at short-handed, but I've never experienced anything approaching that in 5 years of playing ring games. I think that my worst swing has been about 180BB at $2-$4 on Paradise, and that was down to my own bad play rather than natural swings (basically, my raising and nicking strategy in weak-tight games had been "found out" by too many players -- although it did work for four months! -- and I was constantly being reraised by one of the two or three players behind me).
Anyway, discounting that, I would think that my worst BB downswing has been (checks charts) £350, or about $650 at the time, equal to 162 big blinds.
However, I did go SIX MONTHS (from early June last year to early November) on US sites for a grand profit of $70. This was followed by a gain of $1900 in nine weeks. So, the variance was definitely there, but the downside of it for me was breaking even...
Re: Nice to see my name in lights!
Date: 2005-05-27 10:23 am (UTC)your worst swing being 180BB has a lot to do with the low variance of your previous playing style and safe nature of your gambling type habits in general (maybe). Now when your climbing the limits things may change.
My worst swings are in that 300-400BB zone. I may have pulled even a little bit bigger one, but that was partly due to very bad game selection.
cheers,
Aksu
Re: Nice to see my name in lights!
Date: 2005-05-27 12:38 pm (UTC)In a sick way, knowing that uve lost more than me makes me feel a little better :)
Misery delights in company.
Except Im surprisingly unmiserable.
I guess Mongy would put us both to shame though, amongst others who rode the drop of the rollercoaster hard.
cheers
Dave
Re: Nice to see my name in lights!
Date: 2005-05-27 12:51 pm (UTC)I suspect that my style will always have a lower long-term EV and a lower volatility, so matter how much I try to change it. And, actually, my current way of playing may be LESS swingy rather than more.
Part of this is down to something we have not yet considered -- I tend to play between 4pm and 8pm UK time, rather than late at night US time. My opponents tend to be tighter, more aware, and more willing to lay down hands. Now, in the long term this will reduce my earn. But it also drastically reduces volatility, because you get far fewer suck-outs.
Still slowly ploughing through a sequence of showdowns in ring games. I'm going to get a Stan James article out of this, and the information SHOULD be very useful. But, man, it's tedious work.
I raise.