November 04, 2010
Never do this, the saga resumes
I suppose if the doomswitch only applies to one stake and one stake only, that can't be too bad. I'm going back to my usual 2/4 tables today, it seems my sojourn to NL50 was destined to failure. A failure that earned me $400 profit, but a failure none the less.
Silliness aside, if anything this should serve as a good example of how variance can be. When you're just starting out you hear the tales, the whispers in the dark of how variance is coming to get you and you think you are ready and when it comes you are not ready and you question yourself and when you start questioning yourself at the table, you play worse. Remember all that cheesy mental stuff, because it is true. There is no run good or run bad, there is the hand you are playing and there is an optimal way to play it. Save any other thoughts for your coach and for time away from the table. If you can't stop thinking about your variance at the table: Quit.
4 Comments:
bosoxx34 posted on November 04, 2010 at 22:38 PM
lol, why not just start at 200?
inavacuum posted on November 04, 2010 at 22:54 PM
I have no serious desire to play 50 OR 200, I just felt as though 50 was taunting me :(
Int20h posted on November 20, 2010 at 01:40 AM
Do you ever get the feeling that you might not be playing as good at NL50, compared to NL200, because it might not feel as much of a challenge as NL200?
If you are a winner at a certain stake, how does one find the motivation for playing like 2-3 levels below?
Do you ever sit and play at a not so profitable/tough game/table just because you like the challenge?
Love the blog, kind regards.
inavacuum posted on November 20, 2010 at 10:52 AM
No, I don't. Honestly, I try as hard at NL5 as anywhere else. I just like to win the stakes aren't important (obviously to some extent they are, I'm making a living from midstakes and if I played highstakes the money would be important). I just ran really bad at NL50 and really good at NL200.
Log in or sign up to leave a comment!