30/30 vision

I play far too many 100+ hand sessions. That's bad. Why? The longer the session, the more likely it is you'll run into a cooler. However, I love to play, and would feel unsatisfied if the session were too short. What's the answer? I think it lies somewhere in the middle ground. At various times in the past, I've tried to go on a poker diet, but have never been able to stick to it. I think one of the main reasons for this is that the definition of the diet lacked a key element. Heretofore, I defined the diet simply as an optimal number of hands, regardless of where my stack stood when that number had been reached. That doesn't cut it. If you're underwater when you've reached the magic number, there's no way you're going to quit at that point. I still believe the optimal session length is 30, but I'm going to add another element to the diet. That number is also 30; namely, the requirement that I've made a profit of at least 30% of my starting stack amount. I'm calling this 30/30 vision. If, when the 30th hand has rolled around, I've made a profit of at least 30%, that's a good time to quit. Let's see if I can stick to this version of the diet.

During current Hold'em session you were dealt 128 hands and saw flop:
 - 18 out of 20 times while in big blind (90%)
 - 13 out of 18 times while in small blind (72%)
 - 56 out of 90 times in other positions (62%)
 - a total of 87 out of 128 (67%)
 Pots won at showdown - 8 of 20 (40%)
 Pots won without showdown - 9

delta: $-21,030
cash game no limit hold'em balance: $4,985,207
balance: $7,342,160