Well something has to change because my bankroll and I simply cannot take this anymore. The retards were out in full force tonight, like really severely, and again they kicked the shit out of me. With the size of my bankroll and the level of my psychological fortitude, at this point, I don't think I can continue playing SHLHE. I honestly can't remember the last time my set didn't lose to no pair no draw.

Jaime's Theorms of Poker:

1. The long run is longer than you think. By more than you can imagine.
2. Things in no way shape or form have to turn around. You can absolutely play brilliant poker for the rest of your life and lose money.
3. I am very good at some forms of poker.
4. The reason that Phil Ivey is Phil Ivey and some other people that started playing around the same time he did aren't, has more to do with how well Phil ran while climbing the limits than how terrific a player he is.
5. 300 Big Bets is some sort of joke Mason Malmuth came up with.

Xast - you forgot

6. Limit Poker sucks; badly.
You seem to do very well playing MTT's - should you not play some more of those for a while? Less loss if you are on unrecognised tilt too...

Just curious Jaime, without having to stop being a lazy ass and go back through your journal to find out for myself, what do your numbers look like during this bad run? Like VP$IP and Agr., etc...

Can you do a screen shot post of your PT stats for us? I'm not lookin to act like I can give advice or anything, I'm just curious to see them.

tough run, jaime.

300bbs is a joke -- esp. at 6max and SH. 500 is more within the realm of reality for an aggressive player. i would want a 1000bb bakroll i i was serious about SH LHE.

fwiw, i somewhat disagree with #4. Phil Ivey would become Phil Ivey no matter what, imho. it was just a matter of how long it would him to get to the top. running hot helps, but he was acquiring skills at a rapid pace and was able to extract maximum value from the opportunities he was presented with.

Xas,
I don't have a data sample size near as big as this. But is it normal for the total rake paid to be so high compared to your total winnings for that period? I mean WOW!, 18 Frickin GRAND!!!

That total rake paid number has got to be a testamonial as to why it is an absolute must for someone to have a rakeback deal in place when they finally advance far enough in limits that bonuses no longer mean as much to the BR as they used to.

Your "golden standard" 30/20 rule seems a tad loose to me. I'd always been under the impression that 25/18 was closer to a "golden standard". Not sure where I got it from but thats what I had been using. Of course you're probably playing more of a LAG style than I do cuz you actually know what you're doing. I noticed you played tighter in March than the previous months, seems especially so from the blinds, was this just because you started the month out in losing mode or was there another reason to leave what was working for you?

I know you're a good SHLH player but why not switch games for a month just to let the bad mojo evaporate? Stick with your MTT's or triple draw games (Hell, play some form of Omaha which is probably closer to impossible for someone with a penchant for math to lose at) for a month and then come back fresh. (sorry for giving advice after I said I wasn't looking to do that)

Good Luck and I hope the variance finally swings the other way for ya soon,
-Seb

Maybe try NL. You could have stats like CaptZEEbo:

JEEEEEEEEEEEEEEBUS...