Question for any statiticians out there

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

In the past two months, I have played 244 single-table SnG's with 115 in-the-money finishes, slightly over 47%. In that time, I've had one streak of 10 straight out of the money finishes and four other seven game losing streaks. From a statisical standpoint, should I expect to have that many losing streaks losing streaks that are that long?I ask because it doesn't seem like I should be losing that many in a row randomly, not that often anyway. I get frustrated, of course, when I lose. What I am trying to figure out is if it is affecting my game or if it is just random fluctuations. By comparison, my longest winning streak was seven games (six firsts and a second, that was fun) and I have only had one streak that long.Thanks for your help.

[Orion071 0]

In the past two months, I have played 244 single-table SnG's with 115 in-the-money finishes, slightly over 47%.  In that time, I've had one streak of 10 straight out of the money finishes and four other seven game losing streaks.  From a statisical standpoint, should I expect to have that many losing streaks losing streaks that are that long?I ask because it doesn't seem like I should be losing that many in a row randomly, not that often anyway.  I get frustrated, of course, when I lose.  What I am trying to figure out is if it is affecting my game or if it is just random fluctuations.  By comparison, my longest winning streak was seven games (six firsts and a second, that was fun) and I have only had one streak that long.Thanks for your help.

244 SnG's is a fairly large amount and if your 47% win rate is assumed to be your "true" win rate, then you only have about a .1% chance of not cashing in 10 straight SnG's. Even a 7 game losing streak is highly unlikely (around 1%). So from this I can say that yes, your frustration at losing is affecting your play. It happens to everyone. I was on a streak recently where I cashed in 8 out of 10 SnG's and then prceded to only cash in 1 of my next 11. My frustration was definitely affecting my play during that streak.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

244 SnG's is a fairly large amount and if your 47% win rate is assumed to be your "true" win rate, then you only have about a .1% chance of not cashing in 10 straight SnG's.  Even a 7 game losing streak is highly unlikely (around 1%).  So from this I can say that yes, your frustration at losing is affecting your play.  It happens to everyone.  I was on a streak recently where I cashed in 8 out of 10 SnG's and then prceded to only cash in 1 of my next 11.  My frustration was definitely affecting my play during that streak.

It is helpful to know that it is something to work on rather than just roll with. Maybe I can find a way around it and jack up my itm% a few more points. Thanks.

[dms26 3]

244 SnG's is a fairly large amount and if your 47% win rate is assumed to be your "true" win rate, then you only have about a .1% chance of not cashing in 10 straight SnG's.  Even a 7 game losing streak is highly unlikely (around 1%).  So from this I can say that yes, your frustration at losing is affecting your play.  It happens to everyone.  I was on a streak recently where I cashed in 8 out of 10 SnG's and then prceded to only cash in 1 of my next 11.  My frustration was definitely affecting my play during that streak.

It is helpful to know that it is something to work on rather than just roll with. Maybe I can find a way around it and jack up my itm% a few more points. Thanks.

You may start to play a little bit differently when you lose 3-4 in a row. So if you get in a rut you may want to stop for a few hours or the day. Even small changes like being passive or going on tilt can cause you to extend your losing streak.

[PMJackson21 0]

In the past two months, I have played 244 single-table SnG's with 115 in-the-money finishes, slightly over 47%.  In that time, I've had one streak of 10 straight out of the money finishes and four other seven game losing streaks.  From a statisical standpoint, should I expect to have that many losing streaks losing streaks that are that long?I ask because it doesn't seem like I should be losing that many in a row randomly, not that often anyway.  I get frustrated, of course, when I lose.  What I am trying to figure out is if it is affecting my game or if it is just random fluctuations.  By comparison, my longest winning streak was seven games (six firsts and a second, that was fun) and I have only had one streak that long.Thanks for your help.

244 SnG's is a fairly large amount and if your 47% win rate is assumed to be your "true" win rate, then you only have about a .1% chance of not cashing in 10 straight SnG's. Even a 7 game losing streak is highly unlikely (around 1%). So from this I can say that yes, your frustration at losing is affecting your play. It happens to everyone. I was on a streak recently where I cashed in 8 out of 10 SnG's and then prceded to only cash in 1 of my next 11. My frustration was definitely affecting my play during that streak.

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....If I flipped a coin 244 times, and 144 came up heads, and 100 tails, I wouldn't believe heads came up more often then tails. If I flipped a coin and the first 7 came up heads, I know that if I continued flipping the coin over a long period of time, sooner or later the numbers would even out. If you are going to look at this from a statistics point of view, a losing streak like that could be just a random fluctuation.On the other hand, your SNG results can't really be looked at in this vein of thought. A SNG isn't a coin flip, or a roll of the dice even...There are so many variables in each SNG, it's difficult to establish any sort of statistical data that holds any water besides maybe what you've already done (money finishes, avg profit, etc). If you lose 5 in a row, that could be because you got unlucky 5 straight SNGs, or it could be because you made horrible decisions for 5 straight SNGs; it's difficult to track something like that because it really is a matter of opinion, and most players wouldn't be honest with themselves.So, to really get to the bottom of something like this, review the hand histories, or have someone who's abilities you respect look them over. See if you are doing anything wrong during these cold streaks, and if it looks like you are still playing your A game during that stretch, then just look at it as a run of bad cards. If however under closer examination your game has some leaks, then you've obviously found the cause of your frustration. :-)Good luck,Patrick

[justblaze 0]

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....damnit, you beat me to it.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....If I flipped a coin 244 times, and 144 came up heads, and 100 tails, I wouldn't believe heads came up more often then tails. If I flipped a coin and the first 7 came up heads, I know that if I continued flipping the coin over a long period of time, sooner or later the numbers would even out. If you are going to look at this from a statistics point of view, a losing streak like that could be just a random fluctuation.On the other hand, your SNG results can't really be looked at in this vein of thought. A SNG isn't a coin flip, or a roll of the dice even...There are so many variables in each SNG, it's difficult to establish any sort of statistical data that holds any water besides maybe what you've already done (money finishes, avg profit, etc). If you lose 5 in a row, that could be because you got unlucky 5 straight SNGs, or it could be because you made horrible decisions for 5 straight SNGs; it's difficult to track something like that because it really is a matter of opinion, and most players wouldn't be honest with themselves.So, to really get to the bottom of something like this, review the hand histories, or have someone who's abilities you respect look them over. See if you are doing anything wrong during these cold streaks, and if it looks like you are still playing your A game during that stretch, then just look at it as a run of bad cards. If however under closer examination your game has some leaks, then you've obviously found the cause of your frustration. :-)Good luck,Patrick

Hand histories are a good idea, I have to admit I've never even looked at that feature. Now that I do, it turns out I can only go back 200 hands which isn't very helpful for backtracking, but might be good for the future.I know (or think I know) that there are three main reasons for losing, only one of which can be controlled - bad cards, bad beats, bad decisions. And I also know, or think I do, that it is a lot easier to blame the first two than face up to that last one. Looking at my game comments from my losing streaks, I do sometimes say I played poorly, but usually just bitch about my horrible luck. Denial in a poker player - shocking, I know.I really liked your point that each SnG is different, so it can be hard to make any conclusions about my play. dms26 suggested I may be going on tilt a bit when I start to lose and I think he may be right. Looking back, some of my comments sound like I was about ready to put my fist through a wall (ie, "Have I mentioned that my luck has just SUCKED lately???"). And I have a large number of notes about losing to a bad beat with a huge lead going in that make me wonder now why I was so anxious to get all my chips in on one hand, impatience and pressing too hard, sounds like.dms' comment has me thinking that tilt doesn't have to be just the obvious all-in with a bad hand or afraid to play anything but AA. At my skill level (I'm still just a beginner, only been playing since January), just a little tilt might be enough to turn me from a modest winner into a sizeable loser.Thanks to everyone for their comments, I have found them very helpful.

[711Buddha 0]

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....damnit, you beat me to it.

Its not a sample. Its a parameter. A sample is when you take some portion of the data to evaluate. In this case you are actually taking it all. Sorry, but to calculate this you really need analysis beyond "cashing frequency." When I see you write that tend to go on "loosing streaks" my first assumption is that you have a tendancy to tilt.Expressed mathematically, it would mean that the chance of loosing any particular SNG is not a static 53% and I would attempt to correlate it back to the previous game. For example, you may may loose 53% overall but 60% when you lost the immediately precceding game and 75% when its been the last two. (And just 40% when you've won one.) This sort of tilt model may better express your play. You should consider it. It mnight make sense to change your play so you break after each loss or similiar strategy.

[PMJackson21 0]

Hand histories are a good idea, I have to admit I've never even looked at that feature. Now that I do, it turns out I can only go back 200 hands which isn't very helpful for backtracking, but might be good for the future.

Depending on where you play, some sites will send you past hand histories if you email and ask. They keep all HHs on file so they can review them in regards to collusion, etc. Obviously, some people's' customer service is vastly superior to others though.Also depending on where you play, some sites will allow you to email yourself all the HH from a tournament you just played. Others you have to either request the HH after every hand, or cut and paste etc. There's a program for UB (the name escapes me) that will save all your HHs for you as you play, which is useful.Either way, reviewing hand histories is one of the benefits of online poker that you should never disregard. Being able to have an instant written documentation of how a hand played out can be invaluable as a tool to analyze your game. Plus, it's a lot easier to see where you make your mistakes when it's in black and white. Also, it's another way to analyze an opponent's game as well. For instance, when you bet on the river with a winning hand, and your opponent calls then mucks, a HH will show you what cards he mucked. From there, you can reconstruct the hand and look at it from your opponent's point of view. “Know thy enemy and know thy self and you will win a hundred battles.”Sun Tzu Wu's 'The Art of War'I've always thought that book, and that quote in particular, applied very well to poker. Patrick

[justblaze 0]

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....damnit, you beat me to it.

Its not a sample. Its a parameter. A sample is when you take some portion of the data to evaluate. In this case you are actually taking it all. Sorry, but to calculate this you really need analysis beyond "cashing frequency." When I see you write that tend to go on "loosing streaks" my first assumption is that you have a tendancy to tilt.Expressed mathematically, it would mean that the chance of loosing any particular SNG is not a static 53% and I would attempt to correlate it back to the previous game. For example, you may may loose 53% overall but 60% when you lost the immediately precceding game and 75% when its been the last two. (And just 40% when you've won one.) This sort of tilt model may better express your play. You should consider it. It mnight make sense to change your play so you break after each loss or similiar strategy.

sorry, but every mathematical discussion about poker i have ever heard has referred to all of the hands (or tournaments or SNGs or whathaveyou) a player has played as his 'sample'.

[711Buddha 0]

sorry, but every mathematical discussion about poker i have ever heard has referred to all of the hands (or tournaments or SNGs or whathaveyou) a player has played as his 'sample'.

Truce!I know, its kind of a pet peeve of mine. (I do alot of finite math and analysis in my work) It probably fair to say that in common usage and in particular in poker circles the term "sample" refers to parameter. It usually goes to calculating significance and confidence intervals etc. Obviously these aren't commonly done in poker for exactly the reason you describe. You don't need to express that you are 90% sure of something when you are 100% sure (i.e. you've accounted for all the data.) I wasn't really flaming you so much as whining about word usage - sorry if it came off that way.

[justblaze 0]

sorry, but every mathematical discussion about poker i have ever heard has referred to all of the hands (or tournaments or SNGs or whathaveyou) a player has played as his 'sample'.

Truce!I know, its kind of a pet peeve of mine. (I do alot of finite math and analysis in my work) It probably fair to say that in common usage and in particular in poker circles the term "sample" refers to parameter. It usually goes to calculating significance and confidence intervals etc. Obviously these aren't commonly done in poker for exactly the reason you describe. You don't need to express that you are 90% sure of something when you are 100% sure (i.e. you've accounted for all the data.) I wasn't really flaming you so much as whining about word usage - sorry if it came off that way.

i wasnt flaming you back. i was really apologizing. im sure the true mathematical word is parameter, its just easier to follow convention and use sample.

[EyeintheSkyy 0]

In the world of statistics, 244 is _not_ a fairly large amount at all; in fact, it's a fairly small sample size....damnit, you beat me to it.

Its not a sample. Its a parameter. A sample is when you take some portion of the data to evaluate. In this case you are actually taking it all. Sorry, but to calculate this you really need analysis beyond "cashing frequency." When I see you write that tend to go on "loosing streaks" my first assumption is that you have a tendancy to tilt.Expressed mathematically, it would mean that the chance of loosing any particular SNG is not a static 53% and I would attempt to correlate it back to the previous game. For example, you may may loose 53% overall but 60% when you lost the immediately precceding game and 75% when its been the last two. (And just 40% when you've won one.) This sort of tilt model may better express your play. You should consider it. It mnight make sense to change your play so you break after each loss or similiar strategy.

Very interesting.I just tried this looking at results for April and May (my 10-game losing streak was in March and I think March may be a bit dated given that my game has changed quite a bit over the last couple of months). I had 37 losses after a win, 19 after a single loss, 12 after two, seven after three. From there, there is little drop-off - six after four, five after five and four losses after six straight (the four seven-game losing streaks). So, it sounds like I have to consider that three straight losses may be a very bad sign for me. Thanks for the response.

[PMJackson21 0]

I wasn't really flaming you so much as whining about word usage - sorry if it came off that way.

No, you were flaming me! Back off! ;-) j/kOn a side note, do you practice Buddhism, or is that just your id/avatar?Patrick

[711Buddha 0]

I'm not a very good oneI do not eat well. I do try to follow the tennent of right speech (not flaming) and if I give offense I try to apologize, like now.It helps playing hold'em, very easy to fold :-) For me the idea of "strict buddhist" seems nonsensical, so I try not to over do it. I do admit that I have a fondness for slushies.

[PMJackson21 0]

I'm not a very good oneI do not eat well. I do try to follow the tennent of right speech (not flaming) and if I give offense I try to apologize, like now.It helps playing hold'em, very easy to fold :-) For me the idea of "strict buddhist" seems nonsensical, so I try not to over do it. I do admit that I have a fondness for slushies.

Ha, yeah I fall into the same category as you it sounds like. Far from perfect, but I try to incorporate as much of it into my daily life as I can.I've found it to be helpful in poker to say the least. Here's an interesting article Howard L. wrote about Zen and poker, in case you've never seen it. http://www.howardlederer.com/a­rticle9.html Also, this is a great book regarding Zen and poker(again, in case you've never seen it). The author still occasionally posts to RGP too.http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...941628?v=glancePatrick

[711Buddha 0]

I really enjoyed Larry Phillip's book. His chapter on learing to fold really ought to be at the front of every poker book. I've book marked Howard's article - I'll check it out later, thanks.

[tampapoker 0]

I'm not a very good oneI do not eat well.  I do try to follow the tennent of right speech (not flaming) and if I give offense I try to apologize, like now.It helps playing hold'em, very easy to fold  :-)  For me the idea of "strict buddhist" seems nonsensical, so I try not to over do it.  I do admit that I have a fondness for slushies.

If Phil Hellmuth folds in the forest, and there is no one around to here him, is he still complaining?

[PMJackson21 0]

I'm not a very good oneI do not eat well.  I do try to follow the tennent of right speech (not flaming) and if I give offense I try to apologize, like now.It helps playing hold'em, very easy to fold  :-)  For me the idea of "strict buddhist" seems nonsensical, so I try not to over do it.  I do admit that I have a fondness for slushies.

If Phil Hellmuth folds in the forest, and there is no one around to here him, is he still complaining?

That's a trick question since Phil doesn't complain when he folds - he brags about what a great lay down it was. :-)And if there was no one around for him to boast to, he would find someone...or something...Perhaps a slow moving deer, who would be forced to listen to Phil explain how he 'Looked into their soul from under my fine Oakley sunglasses...'Patrick