November 25, 2011

Dear Father Christmas...

It's been a while since I updated. About a month ago I decided to move over to 45-mans and 180-mans after having my soul crushed in 18-mans. I've gradually been weaning 18-mans back in for a number of reasons.

  1. I think they are my best game
  2. I am currently #1 in the 2011 Sharkscope leaderboard for "All games $16-$35", and would like to ensure I ship the platinum star
  3. I am at almost certain I am going to pursue Supernova Elite next year, with 18-mans being the main game I plan to play.

I think dipping my feet into some 45-mans and 180-mans has helped freshen up my game a little bit, and it's been good to avoid seeing the same regs at the tables every day, but I feel comfortable enough to pick and choose which of these games I want to play dependant on how I'm feeling each day.


If you have been following my blog recently, you will know I've really been struggling over the last few weeks.
After a 6 week break over the summer in which I moved house, got married and went on my honeymoon, I have had my most testing time in poker ever.

The funny thing is, if you look at some of my results since Sept 1st 2011, you might wonder WTF I'm complaining about, as it would appear I am doing very well:



Unfortunately, that isn't the whole story. I'm on an insano-brutal-getthefkouttahere-death run in $60 and $100 18-mans, and am on an ever-pleasant 200 buy-in downswing in $15 180-mans:


I really don't understand how I can be such a consistent winning player in the lower buy-in 18-mans but be dying a death in the higher buy-ins 18-mans. I don't believe myself to be playing them any differently, and I don't think they are particularly tougher. Is it really possible to be running this far below expectation?  I'm not so worried about 180-mans as there is no way I'm not beating those games, and 200 buy-in downswings aren't out of the ordinary. It doesn't make it any less painful though.

You might wonder why I am continuing to subject myself to the pain of the higher buy-ins when I can apparently do perfectly well for myself in the lower buy-ins. I think it's mainly because I refuse to give in to variance. I'm trying so hard not to be results orientated. I know I'm not a -12% ROI player FFS. That would make me a fish. Even if I had many leaks I couldn't be doing that badly.

I've found myself hunting through hand histories, instilled with paranoia that I'm somehow getting sat out on random tables and that's why my win-rate is so disastrous in places, but I haven't been able to find anything like that.

All I can do is work on my game, try and put as much volume in as I can before Christmas so that variance evens itself more quickly, and pray to the Poker Gods that my luck changes.


Dear Father Christmas,

For this Christmas, I want my sick graph back.

Pretty please,
James

November 08, 2011

24,000 SNGs in one month?!!

I belatedly came across a prop-bet that occurred in October where SNG grinder Martin Phalaz, from the Czech Republic, had a sick task on his hands. Under his PokerStars screename 'phasE89', he had to play a massive 24,000 SNGs in one month and make a net profit (not including rakeback) during that time. The odds were 3 to 1 in his favour (if he was successful he would win 3 times his bets)

To date, I myself have played 23,000 SNGs in the whole of 2011, so playing this amount of SNGs in just one month sounds completely insane to me. When I first heard about the prop-bet I assumed he must have been playing Hyper-Turbo SNGs, but it was actually all done playing Fifty50 SNGs. I was surprised that these games were popular enough to allow this kind of volume, especially at high stakes, but with an average buy-in of $51 over the course of the bet, apparently they are!

He ended up winning the prop bet with just a couple of hours to spare, playing 24,035 SNGs in the month of October, profiting $2,898. Over the course of the month he played around 750,000 hands!


Actually though his winnings were much more sick than that. He had wagered approximately $5k on completing the bet at 3 to 1, so won $15k in bets. Factor in roughly $25k in accrued rakeback, and we're talking over $40,000 in winnings. Not bad for a months work (albeit a ridiculously hard months work)!

However it wasn't all plain sailing, phasE89 got off to a horrific start, and at the halfway point of 12,000 games was $16,000 in the red, and running badly below EV. Fortunately for him, and to the chagrin of those who bet against him, he proceeded to go on a sick heater and pulled it out of the bag. You can follow the highs and lows of the prop-bet in the 2+2 thread. Below are some graphs and stats that phasE89 himself provided:

Games played total: 24.035 games
Number of hands played total: approx 750k hands
Total cashes: $1,277,676
Total profit: $2,898
Rake paid: $54,998
Rakeback (46%, based on 600k Milestone): $25,299
Total profit including rakeback: $28,198
Average duration: 27.2 min
Average Buyin: $53.10
ITM %: 51.2%
Number of hours: 385 hours
Hourly rate: $7.53
Hourly rate including rakeback: $73.24
Total bets made: $4,563 mine vs $13,689 bettors
Total earned (profit+ rakeback + bets): $41,889

VPPs earned: 302,558
FPPs earned: 1,058,953
phasE89 SNGs October 2011
Stakes - Games played / ROI / profit:
$15 - 3056 / 4.17% / $1.864
$30 - 9399 / 3.1 % / $8.754
$60 - 7524 / -0.6 % / $-2.463
$100 - 3158 / 1.5% / $4.669
$200 - 898 / -5.5 % / $-9.925
The Poker Gods were partially responsible for the prop-bet victory, based on that red line!
After earning 300,000 VPPs in one month, and holding 667,000 VPPs for 2011, phasE89's next aim is to make Supernova Elite by the end of the year, which requires him to earn 1 million VPPs for the year (or raking just over $180,000).