"Reading tilt" - Raises after big lost pots?

[K. C?]

I know I used to do it fairly often in my home games...You lose a big pot, and even though you've still got a decent-sized stack left, you go off and raise the next pot with whatever you have, hoping to regain losses. How often would you imagine this occurs online? I'm at SNGs, like 5-handed, someone loses about half his stack and immediately raises the next hand. What % of the time would you say this is tilt versus the % the guy has it for real. Probably depends on the stakes of the game, as well.

A HH would probably be good, but here's the scenario...5-Handed, two biggest stacks are at 5000, everyone else has about 1600. The two big stacks battle it out and one takes down an 7500 pot, putting the other big stack at a still-pretty-damn-good position at 2500. But the very next hand, the 2500 stack raises UTG to 600, standard 3xBB raise. How likely is it that he has an actual hand versus the probability that he's steamed and playing any two cards to steal the blinds?

Also, not completely unrelated, what about consecutive raises. 2-3 hands in a row, the same guy raising pre-flop the same amount. I know because I've gotten those rare card rushes where you see KK, AK, QQ, AKs within 4 hands, and I've seen others get them too. But do people really have it when they keep raising, or are they just maniacs, or are they trying to keep stealing blinds (even at level 1?)? Any opinions on these subjects?

[SnoT_III]

Normally the person who goes "on tilt" has a decent hand. Just my personal experience though,

[TLR]

I play $5 and $10 SnG and I see people go on tilt after a big loss, although not too often. It usually happens when they become short stacked and lose their faith in the ability to win.

Regarding consecutive reraises - it is not that rare to get a few good hands in a row, 2-3 is definitly common, if someone was raising 5 or more in a row I would be suspcious of a player who is too loose.

Regarding raises early in Sng - at least at the level I play I dont really care if they have a good hand or not, the blinds are just too low to fight over, if I have a good starting hand I will play it and if not I have no problem folding, it is usually not worth it to risk too many chips on a marginal hand early.
However if you see someone who is a total maniac that raises everything and you can isolate him on a decent hand by all means do it - he is giving away chips, you might as well be the one taking advantage of it.

[TLR]

BTW How many Sng's a day do you play in order to make $1000 in 30 days on the $5 Sngs?

[drmcboy]

if it's level 1/2, who cares if they are stealing. calling if you've got good implied odds, re raise with a good hand, end of story. Later on I'd be more worried about someone stealing MY blind 3 times in a row vs stealing three pots in a row.

You do see the random tilt move with nothing now and again, but I agree the guy usually has a hand. If I lose a big pot then pick up a monster, I'll usually play it fast hoping people will think tilt. Also if you're in that weird area with say 10xBB and you're looking at 99ish type hands and trying to decide on 3x raise vs AI, I'm more likely to move it AI if I've just taken a hit to the stack.

[rubixstreub]

*EDIT: This is all wrong... can I get an emoticon?

I haven't taken a math class since high school so this could be way off,

but it you were in the money 50% of the time and to make things simple, and evenly split between 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. You'd average just under $15 (given a 10% rake) for every win.

$1000/$15 = 67 wins (rounded up)
134 SnG's with a 50% In the money
134(games)/30(days) = 4.5 games daily = 5 games daily.

I'd say at least 5 games daily, saying you keep your In the money rate high (and you're winning not just 3rds).

*Note, at an average of 1 hour 15 minutes per SnG, you're only making slightly more than a minimum wage job for you time.
2.5 hours of SnG's ($6 an hour) = $15 (at 50% win rate)
2.5 hours of minimum wage ($5.15 per hour) = $12.88

Sure poker is more fun, but I imagine the stress of playing over 6 hours of poker a day, it would quickly lose it's luster.

Someone smarter than me, plz check my fuzzy math- like I said it's been awhile and I'm fairly certain I'm off with how the rake factors into an average win. Play to win, but at this level, play for fun.

[aleksandr]

Solution: Move up to the $10 SNGs

[koolmoe]

but it you were in the money 50% of the time and to make things simple, and evenly split between 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. You'd average just under $15 (given a 10% rake) for every win.

I don't think this is correct. In a ten-player SnG, the profits are $19.50, $9.50, and $4.50, assuming a $0.50 rake and 50%, 30%, 20% distributions. Average profit per win under your assumption of even distribution of ITM finishes would be $11.17. Average profit per tourney would be $5.58 for a return on investment over 110% (perhaps unrealistic?).

I imagine the stress of playing over 6 hours of poker a day, it would quickly lose it's luster.

It wouldn't necessarily take 6 hours to play 5 SnG's because of multitabling.

[rubixstreub]

You're right, I'm way off... I was factoring winning without taking investment into consideration.

So roughly 179 games if you place in the money 50% of the time given an average spread of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd.

So about 6 games a day.

3 tables at a time, and you're all good!