spoony on graphs

<joehaw> is it normal to have redline variance?
<joehaw> at 2nl?
<joehaw> ive dropped like 8 bucks last 4k hands
<spoonitnow> No it should be a straight line....
<spoonitnow> ...... like that would even make sense
<joehaw> ill show graph hold on its gay
<spoonitnow> There's one line that matters
<spoonitnow> The one that shows if you're playing well or not
<martyb> theres a line for that
<martyb> ?
<spoonitnow> Pro tip: Said line doesn't exist
<martyb> haha
<spoonitnow> So stop giving a shit about graphs

<spoonitnow> There's one line that matters
<spoonitnow> The one that shows if you're playing well or not
<spoonitnow> Pro tip: Said line doesn't exist
<spoonitnow> So stop giving a shit about graphs

Lmao

Stop giving a shit about graphs.
Now thats funy.
redline variance >>>> arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrg
lol

Focus on the game and stop giving a shit about graphs.

Good luck

there is no way to have a positive red line and be playing with the best exploitative strategy at 2NL

I think at SSNL it might be best to run over the regs just a little though

Originally Posted by nish81

If 'red line variance' is very uncommon at 2nl, wouldn't that indicate that there's a higher chance of joehaw not playing his hands well, rather than his downswing just being neg variance? i.e. isn't his question relevant to whether he's playing well or not? obv there's no line or stat that says how well you're playing..but they do give clues.

No.

what about this graph http://www.pokertableratings.com/sta...rch/spoonitnow

Originally Posted by DaddyDeez

what about this graph http://www.pokertableratings.com/sta...rch/spoonitnow

My PTR has about 10-15% of what I've played at the stakes it tracks.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

Originally Posted by nish81

If 'red line variance' is very uncommon at 2nl, wouldn't that indicate that there's a higher chance of joehaw not playing his hands well, rather than his downswing just being neg variance? i.e. isn't his question relevant to whether he's playing well or not? obv there's no line or stat that says how well you're playing..but they do give clues.

No.

I should probably clarify my answer a bit. Graphs can give you clues as to things you could do better, but the vast majority of the time you would be better off not even looking at a graph ever. As for non-showdown winnings, there is a very large over-emphasis on how much non-showdown winnings matter, not to mention a very large over-emphasis on how much win-rate matters over small samples (<100k).

My answer of "no" was to the part in bold above.

On sort of a side note, your answer shows that you have a [very common] misunderstanding of what variance is. I'm planning on doing a thread soon that will contain the answer to this (among other things of course).

This is what I was talking about- I was having a lot of success w cbetting a shit ton for a while and started to think that was normal and now ive run into a lot of floaters I guess and I've made the mistake of 2barrelling in very unprofitable situations a few times.

Its really frustrating to be breakeven for 6k hands at 2nl and thats why I was trying to find something to pin it on, but Im quite certain im just getting into too many nasty situations w/o the best hand and just need to tighten up and valuebet the fuck out of people some more.

there is no way to have a positive red line and be playing with the best exploitative strategy at 2NL

Im thinking I need to take this to heart and just cool it for a little bit on trying to win more than my fair share of pots.

Anyways, im looking forward to your thread on variance spoon

Originally Posted by JoeHaw

Its really frustrating to be breakeven for 6k hands at 2nl

This is probably your big mistake. First, 6000 hands is nothing (and not even close to being something besides nothing). Second, being frustrated over your results is retarded.