|
|
|
|
#1
02-21-06, 12:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
I agree with TP 45% is way too loose for a full table.
I usually aim for 22-28%, may be a bit tight, but when I am that disciplined, I seem to win more money.
__________________
I can only be Me, 'cause that is who I am! |
|
#2
02-21-06, 01:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Without looking at the numbers at all, the numbers for a particular session don't necessary indicate how well/poorly you played.
You can have the most awful numbers out there....but if you made the right decision, you still play well. I usually disregard the numbers and worry about the play. If I make a poor decision, then I think I play poorly...regardless if I won a huge pot as a result. Numbers will change as with the table, opponents, and situations that are faced....don't worry about them as much as the decision you make. |
|
#3
02-21-06, 02:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Seeing nearly half the flops after 182 limit hands is too loose. I don't care how great a run of cards you had, that's too loose, which is the same as making "poor decisions" in my book.
His showdowns won number (THAT is a result) is meaningless, of course, but you can still tell that he's seeing way too many flops. |
|
#4
02-21-06, 06:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
thanks for the info
as for the seeing 45% of the flops, not a whole lot of raising was going on at all, but i still agree this is probably to high of a number, and this was probably my best session ever (profit wise) i bought in with 30$ and walked out with 135$ which means i did make some right moves. |
|
#5
02-21-06, 11:52 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Actually, that's where you are wrong... that means no such thing. Results (money won/lost) from a 200 (or 2000, for that matter) hand session are completely insignificant. If anything, I'd say it shows that you were playing like a maniac and happened to have a good night (normal variance). Playing like that WILL just as easily break you in the long run.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
