should have left an hour earlier

I was up 625$ at a Brick and mortar playing 1/2 NLHE. In the first 3 hours or so, i got a good run of cards (rockets 3 times, all in on two of them, doubled up both times)

But i was dealth QQ and lost about 200$ in 1 hand when i was up against kings. I ended up leaving 210$ richer than i had came in, but i still think i should have left earlier

That's why you have to set goals before you sit down. If you reach your goal in 3 hands, then you reach it. Get up and leave.

Styrofoam said:

I ended up leaving 210$ richer than i had came in

Click to expand...

... and this is what matters.

I've been known to groan over not standing up while I was still largely ahead, but I've also left tables when I've been horribly down - and it's quite possible that I should have stayed at the tables in the latter cases, because maybe I would have gone on a rush starting with the very next hand?

We can't guess the future. If you felt that you had enough of an edge at the table to profitabl stay seated, then you either

a) had a bad run of cards, and you can't predict that. If this was the problem, maybe it helps to think of your entire life as one long poker session, where you take really long bathroom breaks. Don't think of it as "wow, I'm up!" or "gosh, I'm down," but focus on your game and look at your earnings in total instead of what has happened in the last 100 hands.

b) misjudged your edge at the table and were actually up against much stiffer competition than you thought you were. In that case, yes, you probably should have taken the money and left. But that's a lot easier to say in hindsight, isn't it?

Anyway, congratulations on your $210 win. Don't forget that you left with more money than you came - not everyone has that luxury.

smd173 said:

That's why you have to set goals before you sit down. If you reach your goal in 3 hands, then you reach it. Get up and leave.

Click to expand...

No.

The only "goal" you should be setting yourself is to play for as long as it remains profitable. If you stack someone in your third hand at the table, and it's obvious to you you're sitting with 9 complete donks, why on earth would you want to leave? By imposing specific win/loss criteria for quitting you're cutting into more potential profit.

Okay, so sometimes you'll hit a bad run and lose big after winning big, well guess what? It happens! Think of poker as one long session as opposed to lots of short ones and you're taking a step in the right direction, because that's exactly what it is.

If you stayed at the table because in your best judgment the other players were weaker than you and the table was still profitable, then you made the correct decision. In the long run, making situation-based decisions like this as opposed to results-based decisions will make you money - don't worry about a little run of bad luck.

If you stayed at the table but were not in the right frame of mind and ended up losing money through bad decision-making, then that's obviously a leak in your game that needs addressing. Similarly if you ended up changing your play for the worse as a result of your profit (for example some players will tighten up to 'preserve' winnings, other will loosen up because they view their wimmings as more expendable than the money they brought to the table), then this needs looking at too.

(Mike Caro) Poker's stupidest question:
"why didn't you leave when you were $X ahead??"

well because if i was that much ahead, that meant that the game was profitable at the time, so why would i leave?
if the conditions are good, then you try to get in as many hours as possible
i just think it was unlucky that your QQs had to be up against KKs but aside from that one hand it sounds like you did very well

Yeah, i know why I didn't leave...and that isb ecause i doubled up twice in less than 2 hours. I bought in for 100 and was sitting at 350 after getting Rockets twice in 30 minutes. Then, in the bb flopped two pair (10s and 6s) against AT (tptk) and managed to get at least 150 from him...i think closer to 200. The only reason i stayed with QQ was the pot odds were rediculous. I risked 200$ to win almost 500. Definately worth the call, especially with an overpair

I agree with the concept of staying while it's good, but when do you know it's time to leave? If you get way up and then start coming down, how far do you come down before you should stop?

In Sty's case after being $610 up, I might have stopped when I got down to $350-$400 up. Is that the wrong attitude?

In my case, I have a problem with quitting an online game after 25-30 hands or so when I'm up a certain amount. Say I sit down with $20 and get up to $35 (+15). If I sag back to $30 (+10), I notoriously bail out and relish the $10 I made. Maybe it is because in the past I have stayed and lost that profit and more. Even though I'm basing it on past experience, is there anything wrong with my thinking?

MrSticker said:

is there anything wrong with my thinking?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Look at it this way:

Let's, for the sake of simplicity, say that you're the best player at any table you sit down at, at $.50/$1 (I'm guessing these are the limits based on your buy-in).

Your plan is to play 10,000 hands in the next year.

Do you really think you'll win more or less depending on when you take your breaks? Stopping after 20 hands or stopping after 200 doesn't mean anything, as long as you keep coming back to play more eventually - which, if you're a winning player, you should.

Make sense?

FP is right...in a random deal, the cards won't change... the opponents will. If you dont' take advantage of your greater skill then you're going to lose in the long run. Even if you hit a run of cards that goes sour at the table where you're the best shouldn't justify leaving the table.

F Paulsson said:

Let's, for the sake of simplicity, say that you're the best player at any table you sit down at...

Do you really think you'll win more or less depending on when you take your breaks? Stopping after 20 hands or stopping after 200 doesn't mean anything, as long as you keep coming back to play more eventually - which, if you're a winning player, you should.

Make sense?

Click to expand...

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. But what if I'm NOT the best player at the table. Maybe I made some donkey calls & got lucky. Shouldn't I take my money and find a table where I AM the best player? (Hmmm, I guess it's a confidence thing. A table-feel thing, too.)

If you have some reason to think that you don't have an edge at this table, you should definitely take the money and run if you happen to be up. Table and seat selection are two of the most critical decisions to your bankroll. But that said, let me try to put it a different way:

If you play to win, and you think that you're a good enough player to beat the limits you're playing at, then it doesn't really make any difference if you play only one hand or 1000 hands. Basically, at any given table, you have a certain expectation, and if your expectation is good - larger than zero - , you should stay.

This is unlike, for instance, a blackjack table, where your expectation is always lower than zero (or should be, otherwise the house is doing something wrong). If you're playing blackjack and find yourself doubled up, by all means take the money and run.

But if you think you can beat the game, it makes no sense to leave just because you got on a hot rush early. There's no "counter rush" that has to follow. Every hand you win has exactly zero (mathematical) impact on what cards will be dealt in the next hand. Even if you've had pocket aces five times in a row, your chance of being dealt pocket aces are still 1/221 in the next hand.

If, on the other hand, you're a losing player in the long run, it's true that getting up while you're ahead might be a good thing. But then, if you want to keep your money, you will statistically do better if you don't play at all.

See what I mean?

There are of course other aspects, that are outside of the cards; tilt etc. It's possible that you're the kind of player who gets very protective when you've won money, and are afraid to be aggressive in fear of going back down to where you started. In that case, it might make sense to get up if you're ahead a lot.

But yet another thing to consider is the fact that if you play only a few hands before you get up, you will never have time to identify and make use of reads on your opponents. You will constantly be playing against a bunch of strangers.