An up-down-up-down month

[peterbirks]

It was an odd month. despite my cracking profit at 15-30 for the last 10 days of June, I was not comfortable at that level, so I switched back to double-tabling at $5-$10. This would have paid an "expected" profit had it not been for the last couple of days of the month, when the world tried to royally screw me. But 2-tabling at Party is still generating about $10 to $12 an hour, which I can live with at the moment. For the future, I want more, and I must try to summon up the courage to move up in stakes. I just played a bit of $10-$20, but the game was bad (reminiscent of Stars $3-$6), and I missed a bet at the end with AKs, which would have been called by AJ. This was a bad miss and I was annoyed with myself. That's not a good attitude to have when playing poker, so I ducked and ran with my hundred bucks profit. besides, I have a lot of stuff to do, such as this!

The data describing the games could be better phrased. Basically if it's a single number (such as the $60) then that's a tourney entry fee. All of the others describe the betting levels in limit or the blinds in pot-limit.

As I wrote, it was a strange month. From being $500 up after a couple of days, I sank and sank until the 19th, when I found myself about $600 down. Then I zoomed back up the rankings to about $600 up, only for the last weekend to dent the figures somewhat.

In fact it was a losing month, because in this profit is hidden $340 in bonuses. Now, $100 of this was from Ultimate, where I spent most of the month throwing money on the fire (at least, I did when I played limit). Pot Limit Omaha once again proved a friend, despite the low stakes. It's all strange, because I don't think I am any good at the game. I just have to assume that the other players are worse, or that I have been stonkingly lucky. However, that said, yesterday on Paradise I finally felt "in the zone" at PLO. Which is very nice, because I haven't been able to win a twisted groat on that site for about 15 months.

	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	K	L	M	N
4	SITE	STAKE	$15/$30	$5/$10	50c/$1(TD)	$25	$3/$6	25c/50c	$2/$4	$60	$5	50c/$1(PLO)	Grand Total	Avg/hr
5	PTY	WIN	$17.00	$51.50									$68.50
6		HOURS	1.50	41.75									43.25	$1.58
7	Betfair	WIN		$77.00		$162.50				$60.00	$20.00		$199.50
8		HOURS		1.25		3.50				1.00	4.75		10.50	$19.00
9	UB	WIN		$117.00	$6.00		$121.00	$33.00	$3.00			$20.00	$222.00
10		HOURS		1.25	0.25		10.50	12.25	0.50			4.50	29.25	$7.59
11	PS	WIN		$76.00									$76.00
12		HOURS		6.75									6.75	$11.26
13	PP	WIN						$94.90					$94.90
14		HOURS						6.25					6.25	$15.18
15	SJ	WIN		$30.00									$30.00
16		HOURS		0.75									0.75	$40.00
17	WIN		$17.00	$117.50	$6.00	$162.50	$121.00	$127.90	$3.00	$60.00	$20.00	$20.00	$246.90
18	HOURS		1.50	51.75	0.25	3.50	10.50	18.50	0.50	1.00	4.75	4.50	96.75	$2.55
19	Avg/hr		$11.33	$2.27	$24.00	$46.43	$11.52	$6.91	$6.00	$60.00	$4.21	$4.44	$2.55

After two great months, I really shouldn't complain. But, even so, it's perhaps a good idea to go back over hand histories and make notes, just in case something more fundamental than ordinary variance is at play. As I have said, I really must try to stop this hesitancy to bet on the river. I've overcome the fear of the check-raise on the turn, so now all I have to do is do the same on the river! It's simply a matter of saying to myself as I bet: "if he raises, I am folding/calling". Then I am not stuck with a decision when the rare check-raise occurs. Even at $5-$10, players seem reluctant to gamble on getting a check-raise when they have a good hand on the river. So the check represents something dubious at least 95% of the time.

Onwards and upwards!

Comments

Most low-limit Omaha players at Paradise are bad....

[jellymillion.livejournal.com]

... is my ill-considered opinion. Formed completely entirely from a wholly inadequate sample of high-low only limit games. PTO spits at them and their fishy play. And we should be grateful. I have more thanks to offer later.

[(Anonymous)]

I'd want at least 2 Big Bets per 100 hands before I'd consider moving up another limit. At the moment it looks like you're a bit less than 1, which is still great because you are in the black, but maybe not the form to charge up the limits. Unless you play better agianst better players of course.

Rates

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Well, my 20 hours at 15-30 generated 3.5 Big bets per hour, and I didn't feel intimidated. It was just the sheer level of cash rather than the quality of play that made me uncomfortable. Of course, 20 hours as a sample is a spit in the ocean.

My 135 hours at 5-10 (god, is that all) have generated a rate of $15 an hour, but most of this has been 2-tabling, while my rate at 15-30 was from a single table. I think that my rate at 5-10 if I were single-tabling, rather than double-tabling and reading other players' blogs at the same time, might be slightly higher. Well, it would be higher, provided I didn't "out-think" myself.

My biggest fault (and several other players have told me this) has been to give my opponents too much credit. Obviously, if I reach a level where I am no longer giving them too much credit, my results should improve (:-)).

I don't think that an absolute win rate is all that good a guide (unlike in the old days of live games in Vegas, when it was just about the only guide). I strongly doubt that I could beat 50c-$1 for 2 big bets an hour these days, because I am unable to play like an automaton. If there is no intellectual challenge, I find it very difficult. Even a single table of 5-10 gets very boring very quickly, so I start looking for "plays". The two tables eliminate this desire.

So, I guess what I am saying is, I'm not that concerned about my win rate at 5-10 as a guide to how I would do at 15-30. I don't think online poker works like that. If I started treating my opponents as having less acuity, I would do better, but I find that hard to do, because I find it hard to believe that some people are so predictable/stupid/unimaginative. At 15-30 I was at a level where at least a majority of the players seemed to offer some imagination and observation abilities, although a few weak-tight players haunted the corners, like guilty schoolchildren who know that they really shouldn't be in the grown-ups' room.

I've actually watched the 100-200 games a few times for between 15 and 20 minutes, before I got too bored, and I felt that I was getting a handle on those players.

Then again, my analysis might be completely wrong, and the BB-per-hour measurement method could be the most accurate that there is.

Re: Rates

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

One further point here. If I eliminate my first five sessions (of 105), my rate zooms up to $23.50 an hour, which could be a sign that I am improving (well, I know that .... ). If I cut out my last four sessions, three of which have been unusually horrible, but leave the opening five sessions in, then my rate is just over $20 an hour. In other words, the sample as chosen by the fate of when the month ended might have found me at the low end of the curve when it comes to distribution of luck.

If I had to punt, I would say that my "true" 2-tabling rate at 5-10 feels like between $18 to $20 an hour, which rolls in at about $10 per 60 hands and $16.50 per 100.

My fear is that the good times might end very quickly, so, in that sense, a gamble is bnecessary rather than an option, even if I might not be "quite ready" yet. But, at the moment, this is somewhat academic. I'm going to try a "dip your toes" tactic, pulling back to 5-10 at the first sign of potential disaster or tilteroony. My problem is that weak-tight is not in my vocabulary, and as I move up the stakes I get more rather than less aggressive, because I know that the other players are likely to do the same.