I was reading a David Skalansky book today and he was saying winning players have a losing day on average about 1 in 3 times. Just wondering if you players who are consistant winners have noticed such a trend?
Online players differ from what David Sklansky was referring to. For example, player X has been playing online poker as a job for the last two and a half years. He plays 6 to 12 tables at a time and sees between 2000-6000 hands per day. He average’s 16% flops seen and win 25% of those flops seen. So in one day of his play is like weeks worth of play to the “winning player” David Sklansky was talking about. By playing this tight and seeing this many hands, player X average one loosing day to every ten winning days.
I don't really track my play per session since I'm an SnG player, but I keep records of each tournament. I finish in the money over 50% of the games I play, but not quite 2/3 of the games.
Well there must be an 8.6% flaw in your game. Are you over betting your jacks or something? Seriously tho 58% win is still pretty good. Unfortunately I haven't been playing long enough to get an accurate figure but It would be intresting to see some of the others stats.
12 tables is rare and it takes a lot of a person. For 12 tables I usually do 4 NL and 8 PL. However 8 tables is the perfect confort zone.
And online multi-table play makes it a bit harder to figure out. If you play three tables and lose on one but win on the other two did you have a winning session or 2 winning sessions and a losing session?
Good point Bx0101 It is stil beyond me how anyone can play 12 tables and come out a winner. I struggle with 3. Do people play 12 table NL or is it usually limit?
Interesting to see what others have to say about this. I have been keeping stats for almost a year now. I am up for the year and win about 58% of my sessions. Maybe that is too low.
well, i dont know if it's true, but it doesnt show up in my case... looking back on my records, i usually have a losing day about every five days... i certainly think my sample size is large enough, as it spans over years of play...
It all depends on how you play and how the games you're in play. I've heard someone claiming to quote Barry Greenstein saying that he has more losing sessions than winning sessions, but his wins are significantly bigger than his losses.
Well if you are up money by the end of the session after playing those three tables it obviously becomes a winning session. Im talking in general here for the sake of conversation was just wondering if anyone had seen such a trend.