The thing oft repeated about variance is that with a greater number of hands variance is evened out somewhat. So with fewer hands the variance will seem greater. It's the same variance over 5k hands, but in one case it's a full month of running bad, in the other case it's just two days.

This distinction is important because of how we psychologically process the concept of running bad (i.e. we create it - it only exists in our heads).

Ok, so you don't play while exhausted, don't play too many tables and you make sure that external distractions are taken out of the equation... wait - did you just change the topic on me again? Do you play with PATIENCE?

Are you content to play an optimal game, fold a LOT and wait for situations to arise where you have a solid +EV strategy that you can employ? Or are you trying to make it happen? Are you deciding that this line is ok with a bit of fold equity ignoring that in this case you have none? It's likely not something that's clearly visible in hand histories - it's more whether you have the reads that make the play +EV in this specific situation - not in a vacuum.

I'm completely content to disregard session reviews entirely in this situation and ask instead - do you get reads? Do you take notes? Do you use those notes? Do you wait and think about the game flow, recent history and notes before you make your decisions? Do you consider your image at the table?

This is obviously not something I'm particularly strong on myself, so I may just be imagining you having the problems that I do.