How bad can I be and run this good

Back in the Good Old Days (meaning pre-Neteller shut down), I made ~4ptbb/100 at .50/1 on Full Tilt, not including bonuses and rakeback. Neteller shut down in January of 2007 and by April apparently all my donors had busted out and quit. I had a slight loss in April and by the end of the summer I myself had busted and joined the rail birds.

I continued to play a bit of live poker here and there and didn't do too well, mainly because I believe my poker face is horrible and I am extremely readable face-to-face even to a rank ameteur who is "throwing a party." I have talked to and played with a friend of mine who is a gifted people-reader and live pro at 5/10 and we agreed that my mental attitude towards bluffing and value betting has to be the same. Previously, when I would bluff, I sit there calmly figuring that since I had already technically lost the money I had just bet on the bluff, that ship had sailed and only good could come, ie, villian folds. If I use this same attitude when I value bet, any non-verbal tells I give away ought to reflect my same mindset: the chips are already in; the worst thing that can happen is he folds (or has a monster).

I never particularly liked playing online for the lack of the social aspect and actually found it quite monotonous (although perhaps this was just because I was trying to clear bonuses and qualify for the Iron Man). I did enjoy it when I was winning, however.

Shortly before Christmas, I inherited a significant amount of money. I am not a big spender and my friend the pro has always told me that he thinks I can beat the low limit NLHE games at Foxwoods. So I decided to give it a serious shot. After getting called by fourth and fifth pair several times at 1/2, and knowing that I cannot stand showdown poker (bluffing doesn't work even when you know the guy has a weak hand at best), I moved to 2/5 and did well. Not spectacular, just good; I'd consistently be up a couple hundred after a 6-8 hour session.

I have now found some underground games that are only 1/2 and thus better suited to my bankroll, as well as being nearer to home. These are against many of the same people I either lost to or witnessed me losing, so I am a bit leery of trying them again. However, I have been running insanely good. My question is simply this: is this just the good side of variance?

Over the weekend (including monday) I played 22-26 hours of these 1/2 games and made ~$1500. I estimate that I only played about 700 hands, which is nothing, but if your win rate is almost $68/hour and we conservatively (and generously) assume that 35 hands an hour are dealt that is 41.21ptbb/100. So what I'm asking boils down to this: is my ~700 hand sample so small that we cannot determine that my win rate is not positive? I mean if it were 2.5ptbb/100, that would still be more money than I was making when FT was good for me and I'd enjoy it more.

I don't want to lose grandma's money having a good time though.

For a quick reply, you can be insanely horrible and run this good. You have an incredibly small sample size.

Uhh.. Lemmie get this logic straight
My opponents call me down with 4th and 5th pair.
I don't like it when my opponents called me down with 4th and 5th pair
so I moved up to a level where they *won't* call me down with 4th and 5th pair?

This sounds a LOT like "I moved up because they'll respect my raises"

If they call you down with 4th and 5th pair, [quit bluffing with A high and valuebet 3rd pair and better on the river.

Originally Posted by kb coolman

........you can be insanely horrible and run this good. You have an incredibly small sample size.

Andy , I can varify this , reading through your post, i would say you are a better player than me.

Dont lose your Grandmas money. Stick around here and and learn man.

You can be any skill level and run any possible win-rate over any possible sample.

And that's why we make money.

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

And that's why we make money.

I love the moniiiies

Originally Posted by spoonitnow

You can be any skill level and run any possible win-rate over any possible sample.

And that's why we make money.

Game of skill, ldo

if i sit down at a table at a 200/400 table, pick up AA in my first hand and get it all in vs KK and take a stack on my very first hand, it doesnt mean I will have a + winrate at that level.

700 hands is smaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaal.

I've played 700+ hands in an hour.
I'm sure there are guys here who have done that in twenty minutes.