Just gathering a few observations I made that will help me better understand variance and manage expectations (esp concerning the EV line).
For n hands -> inf, my winrate will converge to my EV winrate, however the greenline will NOT converge to the yellow line.
If I throw a fair coin 10 times and I get 8 heads and 2 tails, then over the next 10, 10k, or 10M tosses I'm just as likely to increase as I am to decrease the disparity. However the ratio of #heads/#tails will converge to 1 (central limit theorem).
Once I'm below ev, that money is lost. I am not "owed" anything in the future, since cards have no memory. There's no number of hands that I can play that guarantees me getting closer to the EV line.
The standard deviation of |winrate - EVwinrate| decreases with the square root of the number of hands (assuming the same all-in frequency per 1k hands, which is a fair approximation). The standard deviation of |greenline - yellow line| increases with the square root of the number of hands.
So if in the "typical" database the winrate disparity is 2bb/100 and the EV disparity is 800bb after 50k hands, then after 200k hands (50k*4) the winrate disparity will decrease to 1bb/100 and the EV disparity will increase to 1600bb.
However there is a lot of variance from one sample of 50k hands to another. Certainly this does not allow me to predict the future disparity of winrate and EV line based on my own 50k hands sample. It's only something to help understand how these values will typically evolve, and help me manage expectations.
This is my graph since I started 2tabling Zoom NL10:
Since I'm 5 stacks below EV, this is a good chance to work on my mindset.
First: what is my reaction when I see the graph? Do I start feeling angry, a sense of injustice? Do I start thinking of how big my bankroll would have been? How do these emotions show up in my body? Do I start gritting my teeth in anger, does my stomach contract, do other muscles contract?
I have to remember that the winrate will converge to my EV winrate, but the green line will NOT converge to the orange line. If I'm below EV, that money is lost and there's no number of hands that I can play that guarantees me getting that money back.
So the best thing is to accept that I've been unlucky and start from zero, focusing on what I can control rather than what I cannot.
Second: variance in poker is inevitable. Hoping it didn't exist, or having unrealistic expectations like secretly hoping I'll win every session are not only false, but damaging. If I could win every session, poker would have to be a game of only skill and fish wouldn't play it. How many fish are in a grandmaster chess tournament and how many are there in the WSOP main event?
Third: as Napoleon Hill says,Every adversity carries with it the seed of an equivalent or greater benefit. The great thing about being below EV is that I have a chance to work on my mindset.
If, say, I ran it up to NL1k always running well above EV, what impact would suddenly running bad have, especially at that limit? Of course it would be devastating, it would be more than I can handle. I don't need to guess, because in the past I already have run it up from 20€ to 4.8k (when cash was first introduced in .IT sites, everybody was extremely fishy). Then I hit a downswing at NL100 and stopped playing for several months because I started questioning my game.
Even if I stayed below EV for my whole poker career, this would still be a great chance to build my character and become more perseverant. Looking at the big picture, 20 years from now, what kind of example do I want to give my kids? Give up at the first sign of defeat? Or keep going with no fear, all the way, until I get what I want?
Fourth: the choice of how to react is entirely mine. Whatever happens around me, I always have three choices to make, over which I have total control: 1) What do I focus on? 2) What does it mean? 3) How do I react?
Fifth: If I suddenly start feeling like the unluckiest person in the world, maybe it's time to start thinking about the situation in third-world countries to put things in perspective.
Now look back at the graph... still looking so bad?
Jared Tendler says the best way to improve your game is to identify specific aspects of your C-game and work on them until the corrections become automatic, even under pressure ("unconscious competence" level).
I want to follow this model because I think it makes a lot of sense. So, even though initially I wanted to focus on one aspect of my game a week (currently cbet), I actually need to be more flexible and focus on one topic not for a set amount of time, but until I internalize the correct play and make the right move automatically, even under pressure.
Future plans
After posting 50 hands on cbet in the forums, I think I have a decent grasp of when I should cbet and when I shouldn't.
Perhaps my biggest leak with cbetting was cbetting too much with garbage from SB vs BB, when BB folds too much to steal. It's a clear mistake because BB always has a strong range so I can't cbet liberally, not even on dry flops. I need to realize that I make money when he folds, and be ok with c/folding a lot when he defends, only cbetting when I hit the board well.
I have reviewed those 50 hands once again and today I'll play a session focusin on cbetting, first 2x zoom, then 4x to see whether I still make the right moves under pressure.
Once I'm satisfied I can move over to the next topic - cold calling preflop - starting from DB analysis (like I did with the cbet) and then posting hands on the topic to clear doubts.
I have won a status upgrade, a leakfinder and a private coaching thanks to an initiative on the Italian pokerstrategy community. So, the leakfinder will expose more aspects of my C-game that I can focus on next.
I've been sick for way longer than I thought I'd be, but now I'm back ♠_cool:
Making +EV choices
The main thing I learned from this forced stop is that, no matter how strongly I feel about meeting my objectives, I can't do it without good health.
Of course I already knew the importance of eating well and exercising, but next time I don't want to go jogging or I feel like eating too many sweets, I need to remind myself of the consequences. There's no such thing as "rewarding" myself with something sweet, I'm not a dog. Every piece of food I eat either gives me energy to achieve my goals or it takes away energy. Every little choice is important in the long term, and I must make choices that benefit me in the long term by creating great routines that improve my quality of life.
I found the site stickk.com to be a great way to create new routines - basically, if I don't meet my objectives I lose money. It's like a propbet but automated and with no chance of buying out. I used it last year sporadically but with success.
Routines to create
drink 3L of water/day exercise 5/6 times a day (5k cals/week according to heart monitor) track what I eat on myfitnesspal.com meditate 10-15 minutes a day, in the morning 5 minutes in the morning and 5 in the night, remind myself of my objectives for this year, what happens if I reach them and what happens if I don't
They say it takes 21 days to form a habit. I'm not sure it's proven but it's a good start. I'm starting with the water "propbet" - I created it here:
Not sure if need to be logged in to see it. Anyway, over the next 3 weeks I have to drink 3L of water a day, and if I miss even one day I lose 2 stacks (20 euros, 27 dollars) for each week I miss, and the money goes to NRA (National Rifle Association), which is a cause I definitely do not support, which will motivate me even more to reach the goal.
I "blocked" the tab on Chrome on stickk.com so that the site logo is always visible to remind me of the propbet and make sure I don't miss a day purely because I forgot about it.
Gathering ideas
I wrote some pretty interesting stuff on this blog but I hardly ever have the time to read back the thread looking for what I need, and things will only get worse as the 3d becomes longer. So I will create a post where I collect links to my posts, grouped by category, for my convenience (cbet, cold call, preflop, mindset, creating habits, etc). It's not urgent, just something to remember to do when I have time.
While waiting for the free coaching I won in the Italian Pokerstrategy forum, I'm focusing on another topic: cold calling.
Overview
These are my cold calling stats for my last 20k hands. I don't know whether they are reasonable or not, but I'm surprised that they are more or less the same for each position, except for the value in BB.
Winrate
Winrate by position
I win from BB and a lot from BY, but I lose from the other positions! Am I missing more coldcalling spots from BU? Possible.
Winrate by preflop action
Coldcallare facing 3bet+ is a clear leak, luckily I didn't do it often over 230k hands.
Graphs
Overall graph
Typically, when coldcalling I win at showdown.
In position
IP I win even without showdown (probably because I bet often vs missed; I don't float very often)
OOP
Probably my main leak! Also, I flatted 2k hands OOP and 2.3k hands IP, so I'm calling too much OOP! Or I need to defend better postflop, for instance by donking and c/raising in the right spots
I call too much low PPs (I corrected this leak recently): I play AK, AQ way too passively.
BB defend
Missing 3bets with AJ, maybe AT, and KQ. I'm not sure what to do with low PPs, can probably alternate 3bet and fold.
Also of note, I defend or raise 100% vs a SB minraise, and I think that not doing so would be a mistake.
Postflop plan
IP
Like I said before, I bet a lot vs missed cbet. Strange to note that these hands rarely go at showdown (16%)
Filtering for when I bet vs missed cbet:
I'm printing money...
OOP
This is the filter for when I cold call OOP and then donkbet:
Low sample but looks like a clear +EV play. WTSD 20, so even if I don't represent much, they seem to fold a lot to donkbet! I have to start using this play more and see when it works and when it doesn't.
Conclusions
- betting IP vs missed cbet is very profitable
- cold calling OOP and donkbetting is probably also very profitable and "good for redline"
- I'm probably calling too much OOP (but if donkbetting works then that's not a problem)
- Careful coldcalling PPs to set, I must do it against villains that I have good implied odds against (nit from early, maniac who barrel, fish who pay)
- I'm coldcalling too much from MP, and losing a lot from that position!
- My 3bet is low and I can definitely take part of my coldcalling range and 3bet with it, which has better EV.
I started very well 2-tabling zoom, but then gradually, instead of focusing completely on those 2 tables, which was exactly why I was playing 2 tables instead of 4, I gradually started getting distracted with music and videos during the session. The graph so far is not really satisfying:
I got coolered a lot postflop and I'm also under EV, but the margin for improvement is huge.
The positive thing is that I faced being under EV (up to 8.5 stacks, I believe by far the most BBs I've been unver EV) and I definitely came out of it mentally stronger. And my work ethic remains outstanding.
Concentration and "flow"
Today I got bored of zoom and switched to regular tables and, like my first session 2x'ing zoom, it went very well.
Now, of course there's huge variance and I don't want to read too much into such a small sample, but still, I have a strong feeling that when I'm completely focused and not distracted I can make much higher quality decisions (it only makes sense, but my impression is that the quality of my decisions improves really by A LOT).
A few months ago I read a very interesting book ("Flow, the psychology of optimal experience", by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi - a superprofessor, very very well known in the field of psychology). The gist of the book is contained in this video:
The gist of the video is contained in this graph:
Like Jared Tendler says, it's important to challenge myself constantnly at a level that matches my skill. By so doing I reach a "flow", or my A-game, where I am completely absorbed by poker decisions and I perceive every little detail. This has happened to me in the past, including in the last session, but it doesn't happen consistently.
Why have I played poorly lately? My hypothesis: I started playing well because I was completely focused on poker at first, so I won easily, even too easily, and therefore my level of challenge dropped while my level of skill remained the same, so I got bored (lower-middle part of the graph above).
At this point, to get out of boredom and return to a high level of challenge, instead of focusing on poker again I made the mistake of dividing my attention between youtube and poker at the same time. And the rest is history.
Right now, playing 8 normal tables instead of 2 zoom is a new challenge and requires my full attention, which is why the results are coming back (no time to get distracted and the quality of my decisions has increased a lot)
Again, of course it's not like when I focus I automatically win 35 bb/100 ♦ but still, being totally focused is without doubt the choice that maximizes EV, so it's an easy decision.
Focus test
In the long run, how can I test my levels of concentration during the session? To me, meditation is by far the best way to improve focus.
I use a program that "gongs" (buddhist meditation style) at random intervals, on average every 15 minutes, thanks to this free software. Every time I hear the gong I temporarily take distance from what I'm doing, and from there I can evaluate whether my focus level is adequate, whether I'm tilted, etc
I found this test from Harvard University. It could be useful late at night, maybe I can do it for 30 seconds or so on the hour to see if I'm still thinking straight or it's time to go to bed.
Originally posted by ilioas
NL10 -> Diamond
What is your monthly volume?
Great blog.
[X] following
♦
I won a diamond status upgrade + a leakfinder (which I will get soon) with a promotion on the Italian Pokerstrategy forum. Next month I'll be back to gold or possibly platinum toward the end!
Since I come from forex trading, where it's essential to understand the relationship between risk and reward, I'm writing my thoughts on EV, variance and shotting higher limits:
What matters is not EV, but the relationship between EV and the risk I take compared to my bankroll.
Different players have different levels of risk tolerance. There's degens who do HU4rolls just because "they have edge anyway" and there's who sacrifices EV to limit variance.
If someone offers me a single coinflip for my entire bankroll with 51% chance of winning, I'll refuse because it's too big a risk. But if the same person offers me 100 coinflips at 51% each for 1% of my roll, I'll accept even though the EV is exactly the same.
There is no ideal level of risk tolerance, but there are levels that are mathematically guaranteed to be suboptimal because there is a limit beyond which, long term, the risk of great losses increases while the risk of great winnings remains constant.
Don't bet a fraction of your bankroll greater than $EV/(possible winning). (Kelly criterion)
For instance, a $10 HUSNG player with 5% ROI, who can win, say, $18.40 a match, can never bet more than 0.50/18.40 = 2.7% of his bankroll (that is to say he needs to have at least 37 buy-ins). With a more aggressive BRM he's gambling and his wins or losses will be, in a disproportionate way, a result of variance alone; the risk of going broke will greatly increase but the chance of leveling up will remain the same.
This doesn't mean that $EV/possible winnings is the ideal BRM. On the contrary it's good to be more conservative than Kelly so I'm sure I don't go over. There are no disadvantages in being more conservative than Kelly, it will just take a bit more to level up.
Calculating these BRM values for cash games become hard, but what I wrote above should serve as a reminder than shotting bigger limits out of bankroll is especially bad, even vs fish.
Let's say I have a 5% edge on the field. Then I can bet as much as 5% of my BR in a single pot. This is assuming that 5% is my overall edge, which includes rake, the times I tilt off 2 stacks, and so on.
Since I'll never know my exact edge, it's better to be conservative. If I have 5% edge and BRM of 40 buy-ins (2.5% of my bankroll), I'll always level up; if my real edge is 3% and I take shots with only 20 buy-ins (5% of bankroll), all I'm doing is increasing the chance of going broke without increasing the chance of leveling up.
Careful not to overestimate my edge, which is measured in terms of total profit divided by total money invested.
To estimate my edge I can see how much I paid in rake. Then based on how much the room takes in rake I can estimate how much I invested in pots. Then I divide the EV line by the total investment.
If my edge is X%, I should never risk more than X% of my bankroll in a single pot. This has important consequences in terms of perhaps abandoning the table when the effective stacks are deep.
For instance on stars.IT in 2012-2013 at NL5 I paid $500 in rake and won $450. Rake on stars.IT is 5.50% contributed and at micros you never reach the cap.
So I invested something like 10090$. My edge was $450/$10090 = 4.46%. So at NL5 in 2012-2013 I needed a BRM of at least 23 buy-ins, and using 22 or less is mathematically proven to be suboptimal, and there's no disadvantage to being more conservative, using 25 or 30 buy-ins.
PS: now that I think about it: there's no rake without flop so my calculations are't correct. But they can still be an ok estimation of my postflop edge if I filter hands by saw flop = true, all-in preflop = false.
drink 3L of water/day
I'm printing money...
Before each session, I listen to this short video: 
