post your graphs/charts

[spikeithard]

hey, so below is my live only poker graph/summary of my play from February to last week. a few were $1-2 casino games and the rest were from 25-50c home games.

Im not sure if this is 'taboo' to ask to see others graphs or what not but I noticed I didnt see any other threads on here about it - Im still new to the online poker forum community so dont hate if I am starting a bad thread here. I understand if someone doesnt want the world to see their play but Ill at least show mine.

its not a massive sample.. just a few months (13 sessions) but its decent enough to get an idea.

what skewed my overall was the casino visits.. as you can see the 1 visit alone was like 105 profit and only played 30 minutes ( hit two big hands in about 10 minutes then got a call to get going)
maybe I should separate home games and casino visits??

[DrStrange]

That's a good start!

I would separate $0.25/$0.50 from 1/2. Your standard deviation and win rate calculations aren't that meaningful if you leave them mixed. (I'd separate raked public games from home games too if there is enough data. Lots of people can win without a rake and the better players in a public game, but become small losers at the casino.)

Your total sample size is far too small to reach a conclusion beyond "good start!" Realistically you will want 500 to 1,000 hours to have a stab at a good idea where you stand (shark, fish, breakeven) and several thousand hours to make a specific case.

There are lots of reasons why people don't A) collect this type of data and B) share it with other poeple.

Many players lose. A lot more than half lose If they are playing raked games. It is hard to look reality in the eye and write it all down. In my expereince the average player considers himself to be better than average and a solid long term winner, but he is not and doesn't really want to know. (and I DON'T want him to know either. Come have fun, eat my food & drinks, play with nifty chips, lose $100 or so and go home thinking you are a winner!)

Keeping a consisent record is hard. More than one player I know keeps a "win" record - meaning he writes down all his wins and his small losses but leaves out the nights he gets crushed. (coolers shouldn't count!)

Keeping a record is hard when you go into a down swing. When you win 85% of your sessions, recond keeping is fun and exciting. When you can't grind out a win no matter what and your soul is wounded unto breaking, record keeping isn't so easy and ceratinly isn't fun.

For folks who keep a record, some are losers and don't want to share. Some don't want other folks in their game to know who beats who. Some have remarkable success and don't want to deal with the harsh questioning that seems to always go with posting that type of winning record.

I have been planning to post a huge group record once I hit 500 hours (60+ sessions) worth of data. It seem like we have two or three big winners and two or three losers but the statistics aren't solid yet.

Very interesting -=- DrStrange

[spikeithard]

thanks. Ya I knew what I had was just a start and cant reflect my long term skills. I will try to figure out how to seperate the games. (never thought about the rake though)

I have no problem showing what I have done. everyone has different personalities so some want to stay private. I thought why not have a thread to show your ups and downs if your comfortable with it. should be interesting.

[ChickenNuts]

Yea---I almost posted my record and then I just didn't see a reason to do it. For 99% of the folks on here, I wouldn't care, but I'm sure there are a few I play with and it has got to be -EV. Since I'm down for the last few consecutive sessions, the record keeping does hurt when it seems like there is just more red every time you add something.

Hand histories I enjoy---(thanks Strange)

[bergs]

54 hours over 7 sessions in last 35 days. Lolsohevariance. Most stakes were .25/.50 or .50/1.

[abby's sister]

I've been to two meet-ups. DCSI and WCBIV and played against really good experienced poker players-degens. I would say I was the weakest player at both meet-ups. However, I came away in the black both times. That's enough for me to feel good about my play, don't see the need for charting.

However, those who chart probably take it much more seriously than I do. You're not always going to win and hopefully not always lose. The important thing to remember is; if you can't afford to lose you have no business sitting at the table.

[ChickenNuts]

Originally Posted by abby's sister

....feel good about my play, don't see the need for charting.

However, those who chart probably take it much more seriously than I do.

It isn't about having a graph---it is about keeping a record so you know whether you are a long-term winner or loser.

You're not always going to win and hopefully not always lose. The important thing to remember is; if you can't afford to lose you have no business sitting at the table.

LDO. The stakes are inconsequential.

[spikeithard]

Yes I hate adding a session where I lose 2 buy ins. BUT I lovvvve to add one where I crush the table

[robinnh]

I only keep win/loss records in dollar amounts, and the stakes. I don't track time. I should. I';m winning. I'm winning at a decent rate for the games I play in. I play too few hours for it to be meaningful, so I won't bother graphing or posting.

[KingMedicine]

Originally Posted by rhbergman

54 hours over 7 sessions in last 35 days. Lolsohevariance. Most stakes were .25/.50 or .50/1.

Attachment 31211

plug in your phone!!! Its almost dead!