Joined: May '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 38 (M)
Posts: 2064
Firstly, I realised that my profit for the challenge included $10 or so I made in the Silverstar freeroll, which should not have been included... so my profit was slightly over-stated.
It was actually $201.73, so made no difference to the competition winner.
I knew this would be the case when I totalled everything up, but it's more than I expected.... I did horribly at all games except Hold'em - making losses in everything. Here is the breakdown by game:
Total - 289 games - 21.45% ITM - up $201.73 Hold'em - 204 games - 27.45% ITM - up $351.32 Triple stud - 9 games - 11.10% ITM - down $13.00 Badugi - 10 games - 10.00% ITM - down $5.80 Omahai H/L - 13 games - 0.00% ITM - down $38.50 8-Game - 8 games - 12.50% ITM - down $2.00 2-7 Triple Draw - 7 games - 14.29% ITM - down $10.00 Draw - 8 games - 0.00% ITM - down $14.30 2-7 Single Draw - 2 games - 0.00% ITM - down $4.40 HORSE - 4 games - 0.00% ITM - down $11.00 Omaha - 9 games - 11.11% ITM - down $19.94 Hold'em/Omaha Mixed - 10 games - 10.00% ITM - down $13.95 HOSE - 1 game - 0.00% ITM - down $3.30 Stud H/L - 1 game - 0.00% ITM - down $3.30 Razz - 2 games - 0.00% ITM - down $4.40 Courchevel - 1 game - 0.00% ITM - down $3.30
So next time I do anything like this... Think I'll stick to just Hold'em....
Anything else anyone wants to know, just ask and I'll be happy to answer if I can.
Joined: Mar '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 45 (F)
Posts: 2261
I don't think it was Youts' lack of knowledge which was the ultimate cause in his bad results,I don't know if he would agree with me but I think it was way too much variety in the games which meant too many different tables played at the same time.I'm sure he has posted about good results in the other types of games.
If you had stuck to just hold em the profit would have been really good,I'm sure the percentage for ITM for semi professional tourney players is quite low so your ITM stat of 21% looks very good to me considering you always seemed to be going for win rather than just a min cash.
Do you have the info on how many final tables and how many wins you had?
Joined: May '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 38 (M)
Posts: 2064
I would agree mostly klash... it certainly wasn't lack of knowledge that made for bad results in the other games. It was not having any time to think. Hold'em comes automatically to me now as I've been playing it so long. But the other games require more thought - and it just wasn't possible.
A few times I was folding in the big blind rather than checking to give myself more time on other tables, so I would have missed out on value there... and then in the draw games, I couldn't see how many cards other players were taking - which doesn't help.
I actually have better stats for 2-7, Omaha and Stud than I do for Hold'em.... but Hold'em is just MUCH easier to multi-table.
Joined: Mar '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 45 (F)
Posts: 2261
Well you certainly got the challenge you wanted.!!
I don't mean this to sound harsh but do you think you would have got more first places if this was your normal session?This is not criticism,I think you know what I mean,from your results normally if you had said 32 final tables I would expect you to win more than 3.I would be happy with just the final tables!! The reason I am interested is because I never really got why people took the risk in staking small stakes players when I assumed good players could quite easily make their own money but when you look at the amount of games you played over only one day it has changed my opinion quite a lot.
Joined: May '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 38 (M)
Posts: 2064
The final table stat is a little misleading, as quite a lot of the final tables were in tournies with very low field sizes... so it makes sense that most wouldn't be translated into wins.
But to answer your question, I'd say yes... if I didn't have so much going on, I think I would've won more. Heads-up situations are tough when multi-tabling... It's hard to vary your mind set and push at the right times.
When staking a small stakes player, your just waiting for the bink... the big win. Little wins should cancel out the little losses if your horse is good... so I guess it's a fairly low risk strategy to stake a good player.
Joined: Mar '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 45 (F)
Posts: 2261
I see what you are saying about staking,I looked at it too simply as in if I was a good player why take money and why would a good player want money in micro stakes but I see things differently now and if you have a good trusted player it could be quite exciting if you are willing to give your player a decent bankroll to play their own game.Your challenge has definitely perked up my interest in poker again.
Joined: Apr '09
Location: Australia
Age: 40 (M)
Posts: 6483
I'm not surprised that you only came out in front for NLHE, although - statistically, it is a little odd you didn't even fluke a win for at least one other format.
I'm guessing you play more NLHE than any other format? Your 'auto-pilot' for NL is probably miles ahead of other games.
Personally - I find i can turn a profit on a few other games, but if I play more than 2 or 3 tables, I start to lose.. With NLHE, I can mass-multitable and come out in front because I've come across (variations) of all the decisions MANY times before, so I while obviously I can make better decisions with only a single table open, I can still make winning decisions with many tables.
Whereas, with other formats - I simply haven't played enough hands to be able to make snap-decisions every hand and still come out in front.
So I guess what I am saying is: I wouldn't take it to heart that you only beat NLHE during this challenge, there's a good chance you're still a winning player with the other games, but you just haven't got enough experience yet to be able to mass-table them, not too mention make decisions across many formats of the game, all at the same time.
So I think you're right - if you ever do another one of these volume challenges, stick to NLHE, but if you're playing more regular sessions, you're probably still quite decent in the other formats.
At any rate - massive congrats - honestly, not many people can put in volume like that and come out in front, you've definitely 'proved' yourself as a good MTT player.
Next time, I think stick to NLHE and maybe increase the buyins a little - maybe focusing on NLHE and increasing the stakes will see you come out in front even more next time.
Joined: Feb '14
Location: Tunisia
Age: 35 (M)
Posts: 2135
i think experience was the difference , you obviously are very skilled Holdem player and you have been doing it for so long but in the other games , you had the knowledge but you lacked experience and strategies thats why when you announced the challenge i said you might fail but thanks to holdem you were able to come on top next time you do it stick to holdem , we wanna see major wins from you , so we can celebrate big time
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
It was a good result after all, and the numbers of games you played was crazy If you had played only Holdem then the profit would have been even better. Everything else was down lol. Some of the games dont really worth playing at all tournaments, but at least with omaha one you could have scored. Good luck in your next goal.
Joined: May '12
Location: United Kingdom
Age: 38 (M)
Posts: 2064
I find it interesting that my ITM% for Hold'em throughout this challenge (and other challenges in the past) is comfortably higher than my usual % ....and my other games % is far lower.
I put this down to the fact, that when playing only one NLHE, I'll find myself in spots I don't want to be in and end up losing chips, and therefore money because of it. When playing multiple tournies, I have to fold the marginal hands... and don't feel it obligatory to call down on draws... so playing multiple NLHE tournies actually improves my game.
The opposite is true for other games, as playing multiple tournies massively reduces my edge - seeing how many cards have been drawn by opponents, or being able to calculate odds (which as I've said is pretty automatic with Hold'em) becomes nigh on impossible.
Conclusion: An ABC approach works great for Hold'em, but for the other games you really have to mix things up to get maximum value. Reads on players are far more important, and "general feel" for a hand comes into it much more... whereas that can often lead you astray in Hold'em.
Joined: Mar '09
Location: Greece
Age: 47 (F)
Posts: 14136
In omaha there is a large number of players playing "mechanically" if i could say that. No matter what the other players may have, they are playing a specific hand, exactly the same way, over and over again. In smaller sites helps a lot having them tagged and that improves your payrate But in sites with such a big player field is hard to do. I dont know if all these tracking softwares help into that.
but GG nontheless
