Losing sterak thread - PART THREE

[mickeymouse]

I really want to apologise for thrusting this upon you.

Played again today, a ~ 5 hr session. Lost $1200. This is despite decreasing my max bet due to dwindling bankroll. I was never ahead at any point in the session and lost each hour of play. This included a run of 16 bets lost in a row when the TC remained +3 or higher.

I don't think that the house was actually winning any more money than usual. Players other than myself were getting dealt good hands and winning with them. But almost never me. In fact, I can't even think of any hands where I won and they lost, even though they have no idea of even basic strategy. So many times I was the only player who bust and the rest of the table won. Time after time after time. And I lost my session bankroll after losing four max bets where I was dealt a 12 and busted with a picture card - in succession.

The number of times the dealer got 21 after I got a 20 was countless. On the other hand, I cannot recall a single occasion when he got 21 after I bust.

I am now only $1800 ahead for the year, after about 40 sessions (my record in sessions is 24-16, but I have lost nine of the last eleven, and the wins I have had have been tiny compared to the losses). I was $7700 ahead as of Feburary 15, I have lost $5900 since then without changing any manner in which I play.

I no longer enjoy playing the game. Perhaps I will return to the game at some point in the future but I'm not going to the tables just to play to lose like most of the ploppies who go there. The dealers and the pit staff have treated me wonderfully, given my record so far. But to be at the short end of the stick day in day out gives me no enjoyment in this hobby.

The negative variation extends to outside the game - I play poker recreationally and am just perpetually card dead. Even when I get a good hand I lose to donkeys and worse players. Maybe I am just born unlucky. Maybe I just have a built-in disadvantage. I did NOT go on tilt and raise my bets.

The house edge at my casino is 0.38%. I know my basic strategy inside out. My average bet, at most, is $25.
A basic strategy playing 100 hands an hour (which is an overestimation) would, over an average 4-hour session, lose $25 x 4 x 100 x 0.0038 = $38 during that time. There is no way I am playing a negative expectation game given my spread (1-2x7.5 with a pivot of +2). I am routinely losing just about every session I play.

[Blitzkrieg]

Man that's tough. This is one hell of a losing experience your going through. Will you only be happy after you've given it all back? I think you should have listened to your own advice from yesterday and stopped, by doing so you would have saved yourself $1200. You seem very fortunate to even be ahead.

In poker the worst hand can become the best hand, losing hands win all the time in poker. Just because your hand looks good pre-flop doesn't mean it's going to win. Don't blame the cards, blame the player. Your not born unlucky, you probably need to study both games a bit more. You may not have went on tilt in poker but your bankroll sure went on tilt in blackjack trying to prove to yourself if "it works." So much so your already ready to throw in the towel.

[mickeymouse]

What is that supposed to mean? What would you do if you were in my position? Quit?

I was planning to visit Nevada in September - going to Lake Tahoe, Reno, Carson City and Vegas (there's a number of attractions I didn't make last time). But I ain't playing if all I can do is lose. Let's make it clear that I did not go on tilt. I played every hand by the book and kept track of the cards meticulously. I lost 12% of my turnover today. But what can I do?

[Blitzkrieg]

What is that supposed to mean? What would you do if you were in my position? Quit?

I was planning to visit Nevada in September - going to Lake Tahoe, Reno, Carson City and Vegas (there's a number of attractions I didn't make last time). But I ain't playing if all I can do is lose. Let's make it clear that I did not go on tilt. I played every hand by the book and kept track of the cards meticulously. I lost 12% of my turnover today. But what can I do?

I would stop the bleeding immediately and take a break if I were you.

[mickeymouse]

So you would stop playing? Please note that at no point did I start raising my bets even when I WAS winning. I never had the bankroll to play with a three figure hourly EV.

But having worked out the expected hourly loss for a basic strategy player, I can finally blame this on negative variation only.

[Blitzkrieg]

Stop playing? If I were you yes, you even said so yourself in your opening post. "I no longer enjoy playing the game. Perhaps I will return to the game sometime in the future" Mickeymouse

[mickeymouse]

And let's just say that at no point was I spending any of my profits, all of it was going back to my bankroll

[paymypush]

So you would stop playing? Please note that at no point did I start raising my bets even when I WAS winning. I never had the bankroll to play with a three figure hourly EV.

But having worked out the expected hourly loss for a basic strategy player, I can finally blame this on negative variation only.

You are playing the same game that you were when you were up $7700 in February. If you trust your game and feel that there are no "leaks", by all means keep on playing. Most of us have stories much worse than this small, insignificant sample size. Either way, be honest with yourself.

[Three]

What is that supposed to mean? What would you do if you were in my position? Quit?

I said, I have been in your position numerous times. Each time I took a break and examine my game for where I am possibly making mistakes. Make adjustments to my procedures or knowledge to eliminate mistakes and try to learn more about the game so I was playing a stronger game. Often that means a month or more off. In the mean time I might go back once every couple weeks because one problem that you must fix is a confidence problem. In life your chances of success in any endeavor is proportional to your belief that you will succeed.

From reading your posts I see a lot of room for improvement. You are using an unspecified unbalanced system without any indices. People have told you to take a break to improve your game yet your posts seem to indicate you are playing BS while still making some mistakes. With a pivot of +2 I am guessing you use REKO so maybe you use index plays because in REKO they all have an index of RC +2 (if memory serves). You can probably learn all index plays in a matter of minutes. Hours if your count were balanced so index values are independent of each other.

You may be using a poor choice of count for the games you are attacking. SD and DD are games were PE is much more important and BC less so because you aren't spreading your bets as much. You seem to be playing BS so you shouldn't even consider a pitch game. If you attack shoe games a high BC is a must.

You say the conditions are crowded and the games are not that good yet you seem to show up and play any conditions you find. That is a recipe for losing your entire BR. The N0 is very high so it takes forever to get to a point that you expect to be close to expectation. You will be on a wild ride of BR swings. You want to only play at times you can get good conditions or wong like crazy. Backcounting and wonging out to avoid all negative expectation situations can make the worst crap profitable. You can try to overcome bad rules etc with a giant spread but that makes the ride even wilder and requires a huge BR. It isn't about getting in the most hands. It is about getting in the most quality hands. If you are at a crowded table when that big bet opportunity arises you don't get near as many hands in.

You want to reach N0 quick which is the point of getting in hands. If your N0 is 50K or 100K getting in hands is a drop in the bucket. If you choose good games or attack poor games with a style that lowers your N0 to 20K or less (wonging, hands observed counts toward N0) you don't need to have as many hands to get to the long run. Long run is an exponential function of N0. There is no set definition for the long run but many say when EV hits 3 times SD (that is when you are almost certain to be ahead) which requires 9 times N0 hands to reach. At a NO of 50K that is 450K (900K for a N0 of 100K rounds) hands but with a N0 of 20K you only need to play 180K hands to reach the long run as defined previously. So with that definition of the long run at the minimum game many consider playable, N0 of 20K or less (SCORE of 50+), you hit the long run 2.5 times before the 50K N0 and 5 times before the 100K N0 player. Actually the long run is probably when EV equals an even higher multiple of SD. At EV equals 5 times SD you are multiplying N0 by 25 to get the number of rounds to hit the long run and if you use 10 times SD as when you reach the long run you need 100 times N0 to reach the long run. So if you have a high N0 each hand is a tiny fraction of the value toward reaching the long run compared to if your N0 is low. Like I said most consider a N0 of 20K rounds to be the boundary of what is playable. That is a SCORE of 50.

Are you starting to see why you don't play crappy games or crowded conditions? You can wong heavily to do something about this but the casino will catch on pretty quick in most cases. Crowded conditions not only slow the game down but the other players eat up the good cards in high counts so each time a good opportunity arises the other players may get the good cards and you get bad cards. Then the opportunity is over before you get many rounds in. If you played heads up you would get many more rounds in for each opportunity. Just like your general game having a N0 each bet increment has its own N0. The longer it takes to get to your N0 for the big bets the higher the volatility of your results. If you aren't getting many big bet opportunities because of the others at the table eating cards when you want to bet max you won't reach your big bet N0 very quickly.

I am guessing you could do quite a number of things to increase your chances in the short term if you took the time to learn about what they are. I am also sure you could reduce the likelihood of you making mistakes. This is what you need to examine while you take a break to get your confidence back. Where you are at now appears to be someone that knows just enough to be dangerous to himself. Now go learn enough to be dangerous to the casinos.

[What me worry]

Your streak sounds Identical to the one I just finished. I am very critical of myself and I am also a textbook player with a twist you might say. I decided I was going to be dangerous to the casino so I am going to close the gaps on my game and learn the Indices. I still feel the count I learned is strong enough. I also feel I need to take a class for some professional advice to show me a weakness I can't see for myself.

[SiMi]

Hey, Mickey!

Sorry to hear your bad luck continues... Bummer. I'm on a bad tear myself lately and it isn't fun!

I just wanted to add that N0 is about NOT BEING IN THE HOLE. It's not actually about being ahead $X. N0 is a calculation that is based on the idea that you have played enough rounds at a +EV to OVERCOME a negative variance of X Standard Deviations such that you're not in the hole. The "Long Run" is about achieving a profit based on EV.

If I understand correctly, you're ahead now and I think you may even be somewhere close to EV (but I'm not clear on that aspect of your game). If so, actually, you may be doing just fine OVERALL from a math/stats/probability standpoint and it's really a question of dealing with the mental beating you're taking right now.

People talk about 2 times N0 (what I call "N0sub2") or 3 times N0 ("N0sub3") and so on. These multiples of N0 require the square of the coefficient to N0 as the number of rounds because N0 is calculated on the square ROOT of the number of rounds you play. (This is because SD is the square root of Variance.)

But, again, N0 calculations are telling you the probability of NOT BEING BEHIND after N rounds. N0sub2, for example, tells you how many rounds you must play under stated conditions to OVERCOME a 2 Standard Deviation NEGATIVE swing. In other words, even if your actual results are 2 SD WORSE than EV, you are still not in the hole. When the number of rounds equals N0sub2, you have a good probability (97.72%) of not being in the hole.

Continuing, N0sub3 tells you how many rounds you must play to OVERCOME a 3 SD negative variance. In other words, even if your actual results are 3 SD worse than expected, you have a statistical near certainty (99.87% probability) of not being in the hole. If you're at $0 winnings after N0sub3, you have met the definition because you're not in the hole.

Maybe I'm missing something but I think your actual results are pretty good when viewed in this light. If you're ahead, you are doing better than the Casino expects!

Better luck!
SiMi

[ZeeBabar]

KJ, the addicts, whether cigarettes, alcohol or gambling, cannot stop even if they no longer enjoy it. it's the nature of addiction.

As regards your sharing as a sign of weakness, actually it is maturity. On the other site you mention, there are some who consider it a private chat room for showing off and they are too immature, thus intolerant. Hearing about your downs and your successes gives us, relative newbies, some perspective.

[Blitzkrieg]

So you would stop playing? Please note that at no point did I start raising my bets even when I WAS winning. I never had the bankroll to play with a three figure hourly EV.

But having worked out the expected hourly loss for a basic strategy player, I can finally blame this on negative variation only.

With your indecisiveness and the fact that you keep telling yourself that your going to stop playing the game yet you keep going back for more pain. Your mental game isn't there buddy, you cannot fool me. I can definitely say that you are not all composed mentally because of the mixed emotions you express after losing. But if you would have kept on winning you would be going back for more and more right? That's what I mean. Your in a state of confusion.

Even what you said about the poker cards and losing told me a lot about yourself as a poker player without ever meeting you in person. Never Never Ever blame the cards for losing, blame the poker player for poor decision making skills at the table. Man up and eat the loss for poor play against donkeys. The cards didn't do the betting, you did. Your money is not at risk unless you put it in the pot.