Skip to forum
Variance or just be...
 
Notifications
Clear all

[Closed] Variance or just being rubbish?

8 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
614 Views
w0rm24
Joined: 10.04.2011

I've recently started playing some SH NL2 on stars and I seem to be getting a bit demolished. Over 532 hands, I'm down $15 which to me seems like an awful lot. Admittedly some of that is down to a few massive suckouts against me on the river which probably then leads me to playing like a bit of an idiot and losing even more.

I think 532 hands is a pretty small sample though so variance could have a pretty big effect, especially in SH games. Should I put my bad run down to variance and keep playing for a bit to see how things pan out or should I limit the damage and go play FR games instead, even though I find them a bit boring? :(


7 replies

I would suggest switching to fullring and reading all the basic and bronze articles before you play another hand, your loss rate is brutal and although it could be down to variance, it is very likely that it isnt :)

Try playing 24 tables then you can say its boring


w0rm24
Joined: 10.04.2011

Yeah, as much as I would like to believe it's all down to variance, I'm pretty sure I've just been really spewy post-flop. Looking at my stats on HEM as well, I can see that I cbet waaaaaay too much and I'm not very good at just giving it up, especially when I cbet with air and I'm in a hand with a fish I think I should be beating. Turns out I might have been the fish all along lol :f_cry:


w0rm24 _love:

Most likely it's just bad play. Changing the game is not the best way to handle this problem. I think you should post your hands in our hand evaluation forums.

Good luck.

Cheers,
Michal


7.5 buyins in 532 hands is more likely bad play. Post hands


w0rm24
Joined: 10.04.2011

Ok, I'll try and post a couple of hands from every session in future. Also, NL2 on stars lets you buy in for $5, which I automatically do cause I assume that having the maximum buy in is best but everyone else at the tables seem to buy in for $2-3 dollars so I'm always the largest stack at the table. Does that put me at a disadvantage at all? Should I start only buying in for 100BB?


Originally posted by w0rm24
Ok, I'll try and post a couple of hands from every session in future. Also, NL2 on stars lets you buy in for $5, which I automatically do cause I assume that having the maximum buy in is best but everyone else at the tables seem to buy in for $2-3 dollars so I'm always the largest stack at the table. Does that put me at a disadvantage at all? Should I start only buying in for 100BB?

hi w0rm24 _love:,
At first you should start to buyin for 100BB, exactly. Of course, the most important thing is to improve your game. Just because you buy-in for 100BB won't make you a winning player.

Cheers,
Michal


w0rm24
Joined: 10.04.2011

If only that's all it took to make you good at poker :f_p: