Ok, I'm in total agreement with Ivey, even if I haven't played at quite the same levels.

When I began playing, I played for the lowest buy in I could because I couldn't afford any more. Then, I realized WHY I was playing, and playing at the lowest levels was the right thing to do. I was playing to learn how to play, and the lowest levels were like going to community college for your PHd. Cheap and effective. I remain convinced that if you play correct poker, even at the lowest level, you will win more than the others at the table at that level. I have been proved correct at every level so far.

Most people think you are playing the table, when you are not playing the whole table but only certain ones at the table. At the lowest level, there seems to be a whole table full of fish and sometimes there is. As you go up in levels, there are fewer fish and more fishermen pursuing said fish. At the levels Ivey plays, they have to wait for a whale to come along to feed them all. They get one, on occasion, and it refills their bankrolls.

It appears we are all talking about different things here. I don't understand why one has more violent swings if one is playing correctly. Losing 3 1K buy ins would appear to be a lot compared to 3 $25 buy ins, but proportionately they are the same. That's why I was asking the question, and I guess I still am.

Playing live might be influencing my thoughts and attitudes more, now. When I am sitting and watching, I can actually see the players that I'm going to depend on for my profit, where online it's not as easy. Give me 2 orbits, and I'll have identified my dinner and start to figure out how I'm gonna get his chips.

Make sense?

You have more violent swings at higher levels of play because your edge is smaller. So, in order to post an acceptable win rate, you have to push the smallest of edges - which are unnecessary at the smaller limits (they are often -EV at lower limits since players are just too stupid. But even assuming that small edges are still +EV edges at the smaller limits, they're unneccessary and only really add variance instead of appreciable EV). Your SD goes up AND your WR often goes down as you move way up as the opposition gets better.

Nice mini-rant!

I stopped importing hands into PT a few months ago when I found myself worrying about my stats more than correct play. Probably that's going too far. But more time for playing poker and less for obsessing about numbers ==> more money for me.

I have always, ALWAYS, been more interested in playing solid poker than winning money. Here's the thing. You can beat the lower limits by playing a certain way, such as only AA and KK and pairs only if you hit a set. That's a guarantee for a win rate in the + side of the ledger. It will win at limits up to a certain point. After that point, say middle-limits, forget it. You might not even have a positive win rate. You'll have to learn how to play real poker.

The guys in the STT Forum on 2+2 and I used to constantly argue the point. They pointed out to all the money they were making by playing pushbot on Party. Then, when Party changed structures, you should have heard the wails around the world. I was laughing last, that's for sure. I'd spent two years learning to play poker, while they'd spent a lot of time learning how to beat a specific game. Who's better off?

I will on occasion specifically NOT import hands into PT for quite awhile. Then, download a ton. I'm always surprised at how close my stats are every time. I play TAG and there seems to be nothing I can do to change my basic nature. I just hope to improve the sharpness, of the moves I make, winning big pots and losing less on the little pots. It's one way that stats absolutely lie. It's not how much, but when.

Nice rant. I feel the same way.

CJ