Wednesday, February 20, 2008

The middle suck

"One of the cardinal rules of poker blogging is that you never post about having a good run. Doing so is THE sure fire way to an earlier-than-normal reversal of fortune."

Bad Blood

Blood, where were you a week ago? Jamming to metal tunes?
Yep, tide is turnin', beds are burning, whatever you want to call it, my fun little poker run has come to an end.
Shame, too.
As a result, my confidence in my game has taken yet another hit, too, as I can't seem to get any points in the Bodog Blogger tournament race after taking a swim in the $T dollars I earned througout January and February. I really want to play in the final tournament of champions, and not because I want a WSOP seat. I just want to play in a big-time tournament for once. Trust me, my limited bankroll and even more limited time schedule (fish gotta swim, twins gotta eat) leaves me with nary a sniff of the exciting tournaments such as the FTOPS and all the other tournaments you guys are playing.

I guess you're either runnin' bad or runnin' good, but do any of you run in the middle? Lately I've either caught a lot of great starting cards and they don't hit or gone completely card dead for hours at a time at the cash tables. My pocket pairs aren't hosting their threesomes, and when they do, it's on such a scary board that I can't get paid or have to fold.
It's at these times when the confidence in my game goes south in a hurry. I work so hard to avoid the losing streak that comes a-threatnin' to knock at my door (don't let the Devil in) that I play too tight, or at least that's my perception.
I"m always thinking I should be doing more at the tables, even if I am a winning player and especially in tournaments, when I read about all you guys making it to final tables with "no cards" and I can't manage to make one without the deck hitting me in the face.
When you're not getting any hands at all, that's when you start to think the better players would be making money by not relying so much on the starting hands.
I'm not there yet. I don't know if I ever will be.

When you're losing to suckouts, that really sucks, but you know you're playing well because you're getting your money in good. When you're winning, life is beautiful and poker is fun. But when you're stuck in the middle with me, I doubt myself, poker is boring and I'd rather go play Grand Theft Auto.
See you at the Mookie tonight as I piss off the cops enough to try to get a 6-star wanted level.


BadBlood said...

Where was I? Sick as a frickin' dog. Oy.

Riggstad said...

Winning players will have more losing sessions than they will winning sessions...

Maybe. The point is maximizing your wins and minimizing your losses.

Over a period of lets say and 8 hour session, you'll win all your oney in 5 pots or less.

That leads to your question of running somewhere in the middle.

An 8 hour run and winning only 5 pots is brutally craptastic and boring, but at the end of the day, you killed it.

you lose the next three sessions, say one buy-in each and you are still a winning player for the month. Because of that one monster session that really didnt seem monstorous until you cashed out.

Short term results mean nothing. It doesn't make poker any more fun, but you must look at the long haul.

Drizztdj said...

Lately I stack the small stacks, and lose the big pots when draws don't get there/hands don't hold up.

Its all about timing and the other guy having a second best hand.

Mondogarage said...

Lately, it's all about final tabling the $1 and $3 buy-ins, and going out just short of the cash in the $10 and $20 buy-ins. Sucks.