Dubstep said:
hyper turbos have a huge variance so even a 200 bi downswing are normal especially on these 1 dollar hyper turbos. you should only play them with at least a 200-300 dollard bankroll. with less than that, turbo and regular 1 dollard stt are the best choice for you in order to preserve your bankroll.
Yup hypers are killers but to me they are my goldmine. I play heads up hyper ranges from $3-$15. To play this effectively you have to be a trickster , yes and be very skilled at it. Imagine me sitting there playing "good poker" and the villian is raising every hand, i might as well give him my 500 chips from the start because he will take it anyway in blinds. But I do go on downswing and bad runs from time to time, then I switch it up. So basically if you're playing hyper switch it up with some mtt and regular turbo sng.good luck
this graph tells me close to nothing. lets see a graph of your % distribution. or like a % of where you finish in a tournament, that tells me more about your game than this graph.
also, as other have mentioned, your sample size is tiny, the swings in 180s can be huge, but also, there is likely some holes you can plug, or some glaring errors which usually occur in the end game moreso that the early/mid games. missing shoves and calls in the end game are absolute killers to your stack. We want 1-3 place in these games, anything else is a waste of time.
also, as other have mentioned, your sample size is tiny, the swings in 180s can be huge, but also, there is likely some holes you can plug, or some glaring errors which usually occur in the end game moreso that the early/mid games. missing shoves and calls in the end game are absolute killers to your stack. We want 1-3 place in these games, anything else is a waste of time.
Downswing of 120 Games in hyper SnG's is standard mate, You'll have to deal with these when playing hypers.. Varience is at it's best so make sure your nicely bankrolled and have a pretty good nature of handling negetive varience. 120 games downswings are very standard in these type of sng's
The sample is small and hypers do have high variance. This means you can't draw firm conclusions. However, this doesn't mean you should completely ignore the data either.
The effects of variance should be looked at relative to where your earnings curve would be with no net variance; i.e. the positive and negative variance canceled each other out. If you'd be at say +$40, your actual result of -$50 is less likely than if you'd be at say -$20.
So, the fact that you have a net loss suggests, although not very strongly, that you're not a +EV player in these games.
As noted, it would be helpful to have more data such as your ITM and final table %.
The effects of variance should be looked at relative to where your earnings curve would be with no net variance; i.e. the positive and negative variance canceled each other out. If you'd be at say +$40, your actual result of -$50 is less likely than if you'd be at say -$20.
So, the fact that you have a net loss suggests, although not very strongly, that you're not a +EV player in these games.
As noted, it would be helpful to have more data such as your ITM and final table %.
Firstly, I'd say that this isnt really a normal downswing. But then I saw you're playing hyperturbos, so now I'd say yes. And thats not even as bad as it could get. It seems to me that you have played with tournaments you couldnt afford, so its partly your fault, but these games are constant coinflips to me and downswing not always can be blamed on the player only. I mean if any professional player played the $0.02c at PS, how many times do you think he would have cashed? Its different because in 1$ there arent so many fish and a lot less players play there, but everything happens so fast that you cant even see it. Before you know you're out. If you are playing hyperturbos I'd suggest you start with 120+ buy-ins, and I think its not even enough. You should have changed your strategy when you saw yourself losing too much money. So, after all has been said - Yes, this is a normal downswing, but partly its your fault for poor bankroll management.
No offensive meaning, dont get it this way. Wish you luck next time.
No offensive meaning, dont get it this way. Wish you luck next time.
Thanks for the advice and yes i was playing 30 buy ins from advice from a different site. But i will play 300 next time i play hypers. And those are the results from the 1$. the other graph had around 20 $2.50 turbos that i lost.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dubstep said:
Wow, then my advice would be not to visit that other site ever again. 30 buy-ins for hyperturbos is a joke to your bankroll. You can start with 30 buy-ins ONLY if the tournament is not hyperturbo ( or turbo for that matter, if you ask me ) and you feel confident that you have a real possibility to cash most of the times. This confidency usually comes from previous history with that particular tournament. I wouldnt advise you to play any tournament with 30 buy-ins, thats your own decision to make. But if you want to win more than you lose you need to change your strategy. Ive lost a lot of money in poker. Recently I found an article that suggested me to bring just about 1-3 % of my whole bankroll to one table. When I first read it it seemed like a joke. I looked at the tournaments I should have played with $50 dollars and they were a joke. The 1st prizes even seemed insignificant to me, what about last places. But I decided that I need to change my BRM and I followed it strictly. My bankroll started growing slowly and Im still playing according to this rule. It has done a wonderful job for me. I dont want to brag or something, but thanks to this article I now can afford to lose $250 for example on a 2.5/5 cash game and wouldnt even care about it. So, if you are moving up in buy-ins ( tournaments ) you havent played, you better have a significant amount of buy-ins rather than 30 or so. And if you want to bring up your bankroll you need to play more tournaments that has skill involved, not just luck. You might be running up and up slowly, but atleast you're getting somewhere. And your bankroll is not going down. I wish you best of luck and I hope you never experience downswings like this again.
If my advice would mean anything to you, it will be not to play hyperturbos. I think 300 buy-ins is too much, but 200-250 maybe, yes. And as far as turbo's go ( I dont have much experience, but I've made a profit, more or less, out of them, even tho they are fast they have some skill involved ) you could get away with 150 probably. Also, if you havent watched the video above, I'd suggest you do. If you think that your skills are not good enough to win a slow tournament, play faster ones, but play them smart.
I think they can be a great choice for even great players! (actually I don't think it... I know it).el_magiciann said:
I actually think that for players who want to be good hyper players, playing hypers is probably a good idea.
Poker Orifice said:
Why dont you read the whohle post once again, it might make a little more sense into your head, instead of trying to find something thats not even there. In the beginning I said its not normal, BUT then I saw he was playing HYPERTURBO's , which makes it normal in my eyes. It was normal because he was playing hyperturbos with 30 buy-ins which is clearly not enough. I could have said "Yes, you are a bad player and thats not normal downswing", would have that helped him in any way? I was trying to help him improve, not just point out his mistakes. So, this is a forum, in a forum people give away their oppinions. I havent said under any circumstanced that he should accept my oppinion as the only oppinion and way to play poker. Thats for him to decide whether Im right or wrong, but the fact that he posted this thread says itself that he need help. So, if you dont have anything to say about it that could help him, why do you bother speaking to me, but not to him? Im not the one that needs help, he is. Its his thread, so if you dont have anything to say about it, better not say anything at all.
And if you did actually read the whole thread upside down you would have seen what he told us and what he didnt. I did make some random suggestions that turned out to be right, so whats the point in arguing about it? Please, DO NOT respond to this message. If you have anything to say that could help him - tell him, but dont bother speaking to me, atleast not here. When I post my own thread about needing help, you would be very welcome, I promise you that.
Plus, Ive never said he was a bad player. Downswing occur even to the most experienced players, this is why you need to have enough buy-ins so that these swings dont hurt your bankroll that much, rather than diminishing it.
Ok so what is a good buy in amount? Id rather use a conservative approach. I like using the 1% rule for mtt s. Is that an ok amount? and for turbos and hyper turbos should i use like 200 buy ins for turbos and 300 for hyper turbos? Somehow i dont think the chris ferguson rule of 2% applies to all tournment types. What would be a conservative approach for say someone who lives of poker? I want to grind the big multi table sng s like $2.50 and $.3.50 turbo after i move up through the stakes and i will have to go through that 1$ hyper field again. I cant sit for four hours in the slow 1$ tournment when i know there is a hyper 4x faster with alot of bad all ins.
And what does in the money 20% mean about my play?
Wow its says that 100 buy ins is an aggresive bankroll manegment and chris fergusons 50 buy in rule is not even on this chart for mtt lol so many mixed messages its hard to choose
And what does in the money 20% mean about my play?
Wow its says that 100 buy ins is an aggresive bankroll manegment and chris fergusons 50 buy in rule is not even on this chart for mtt lol so many mixed messages its hard to choose
Last edited by a moderator:
Keep in mind that Ferguson is a superior player at every level he played during his challenges. He's also on the tight side relative to other big name pros.Dubstep said:
If you're much better than your opponents, you don't need as big a BR to buffer you against severe bad runs because you won't lose as much as a less skilled player would with the same cards.
And if you're relatively tight, your variance curve will tend to be not quite as wide. So, when you run X standard deviations below expectation for a period, you'll lose less than a player with a wider curve.
