Question about taking shots.

[Justin A]

Supposing a player like me wanted to take a shot at 10/20 6max in the not so near future. Right now I play 5/10, but at a certain predetermined point I would lke to take a shot at 10/20, with a bankroll that I am not actually comfortable enough with to move up full time.

So instead of just moving up, I take a shot, with only fifty big bets. If I lose that money, I go back down to 5/10 and keep grinding.

So now my question, if theoretically I have a 1.5 BB/100 winrate at 10/20 (obviously a conjecture), and a 15 BB/100 standard deviation (too small?), what are the chances that I lose fifty big bets before I win one hundred big bets? Is there any other information I need to provide? How do I figure this out so I can mess around with the numbers a bit? Thanks.

Justin A

Edit: I also posted this in the probability forum but nobody reads that one so I posted it here.

[pfkaok]

I think 15 is really optimistic for SD in a 6max game. Mine's around 17 for the 5/10 game, and from what I've read the 10/20 game is much more AGRO, so the swings are almost certainly higher.

Anyways, you could just use the risk of ruin formula, and plug in the numbers.

e ^ -[( BR * 2 * WR) / (SD)^2]

So if SD is in fact 15, and WR is 1.5 Then your Risk of ruin would be about 51%

You can toy around with the numbers a little, but obviously it'll be higher if your SD is higher, and lower if your WR is higher... also it would be a little lower if you consider that if you're 100BB up then you won't drop down even if you hit a 150BB downswing and wind up 50BB down overall. I don't know if thats what you were saying though

[Justin A]

Thanks, that's perfect.

Justin A

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
Supposing a player like me wanted to take a shot at 10/20 6max in the not so near future. Right now I play 5/10, but at a certain predetermined point I would lke to take a shot at 10/20, with a bankroll that I am not actually comfortable enough with to move up full time.


[/ QUOTE ]

BTW, when are you planning to take a shot at that game?? It seems as there's a huge influx of 2+2ers tyring the 5/10 SH game (myself included), so I wonder how many of them have tried taking a shot, or are planning to do so at 10/20. I definately want to at least give it a shot sometime in the near future, maybe after another 15-20k hands... so I was kind of wondering what would be a good amount to allocate myself in a game that most people seem to agree has huge swings. I was thinking along the lines of 100-150BB. 50BB just seems alittle small to me, as I'd like to at least have a feel for if the game is beatable for me, and 50 seems like I could drop it in a day without gaining much info at all. LIke for example, I have nowhere near enough hands at 5/10 to be able to have a close range for my WR, but I can tell from the way people are playing that I can certainly beat it for a reasonable clip.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
BTW, when are you planning to take a shot at that game?? It seems as there's a huge influx of 2+2ers tyring the 5/10 SH game (myself included), so I wonder how many of them have tried taking a shot, or are planning to do so at 10/20. I definately want to at least give it a shot sometime in the near future, maybe after another 15-20k hands... so I was kind of wondering what would be a good amount to allocate myself in a game that most people seem to agree has huge swings. I was thinking along the lines of 100-150BB. 50BB just seems alittle small to me, as I'd like to at least have a feel for if the game is beatable for me, and 50 seems like I could drop it in a day without gaining much info at all. LIke for example, I have nowhere near enough hands at 5/10 to be able to have a close range for my WR, but I can tell from the way people are playing that I can certainly beat it for a reasonable clip.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems like we're in a similar situation. I've been at 5/10, and like you I don't have enough hands to know my winrate. I was thinking of taking a shot with 50 BB, but after talking with NLSoldier today I think I'll have to allocate at least 100 BB. I'm pretty much taking a break from poker for the rest of the month while I visit family, so I'm going to try to do all sorts of math regarding future EV and such of taking a shot.

As far as beating the game, I'm pretty sure I can just because I've watched the game and there seems to be plenty of fish. I want to take a shot because it would possibly be a faster way to build my bankroll.

When I say I want to take a shot with a short bankroll, it's rather relative, because I already have 300 big bets. I just don't feel like that would be enough for me to move up permanently, and I wouldn't really feel comfortable with much less than 600 big bets. So sometime between now and then I want to take a shot and get myself over 600 big bets so I can stay at that limit permanently.

Justin A

[helpmeout]

I took a shot at $10/$20 and it is a much different game, way more aggressive.

Dont even waste your time with 50BB.

I started off by making 100BB, I then lost most of that before I moved back down. This was over 2500 hands.

If you can afford to lose 150BB then you might want to take a shot but, if you cant handle losing $2k in a couple of days you should probably stay at 5/10.

[kiddo]

My SD at 10/20 (15.3/100) is lower then at 5/10 (15.8/100). My winrate at 5/10 was 3BB/100, at 10/20 2.5BB/100. But since rake is almost half (in BB) at 10/20 I actually is winning 1BB less. I have played 150K at 5/10 and 50K at 10/20. I dont understand why SD is lower, maybe I have become a better player, or maybe I have been running good at 10/20, maybe both?

The problem with playing 10/20 after 5/10 is not so much that you will have bigger swings (well, they will of course double in $) but that the game got a different texture. Most players at 10/20 are not much better then at 5/10, just differnt.

Both the good and the bad players are more aggressive and it takes time to understand how to change your own game. At 5/10 a lot of players are to passive. At 10/20 they are to loose and wants to steal the pot to much.

Its one thing looking at the game, another thing playing it. If u have $2000 I would start with $1000, lose it and go down and replay those hands in Pokertracker over and over and see if u are doing anything wrong. Then up again with next $1000. The texture is so different so it will be very hard to be a winner from first hand.

I lost $2000 at 10/20 (taking shots) before I started to feel comfortable. And I only played 2 tables the first 2-3 weeks I moved up because I wanted to learn, not win. I have played 3 tables for a while now and after christmas I will start with 4 (as I did on 5/10). I dont think its good playing to many tables directly because there is a huge difference between having a winrate at 1.5BB and 2.5BB and if u multitable directly there is a good chance u will win a little less.

[Justin A]

Thank you for the input, that's an excellent response.

Justin A

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Dont even waste your time with 50BB.


[/ QUOTE ]

After talking it over with someone and reading responses here, I agree completely.

[ QUOTE ]
If you can afford to lose 150BB then you might want to take a shot but, if you cant handle losing $2k in a couple of days you should probably stay at 5/10.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's why I'm not taking a shot yet. I'm just starting to plan for it.

Justin A

[pfkaok]

Kiddo- that's a good, informative response... I'm surprised that your SD could be lower at that level with more aggression. Is your VPIP lower since there's more PF raises, so you aren't calling with as many hands that you could profitably limp with at 5/10?? Getting involved in 2-3 less hands per 100 would certainly decrease your variance.

[ QUOTE ]
I dont understand why SD is lower, maybe I have become a better player

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand this, as usually very good players are more aggressive, and have higher SD's than medium/good players. Of course if you're better then you'll have much less losing sessions/days, but thats b/c your expected win is much higher, not b/c your SD is actually lower (or at least I thought)

Right now for me, one of the most enticing thing about the 10/20 game is the decreased % rake. From my datamining I have the avg rake at 2.5% of the pot at 5/10, while its only 1.47% at 10/20. So I just feel like if the players aren't that much better there, then I could be making almost as much BB/100, and way more $$/100. Experience at 6max is more of a concern for me right now than Bankroll. I just don't know if I'd be a winning player vs. increadibly LAG players at 10/20 now. Obviously I wouldn't enjoy losing 150-200 BB's imediately after moving up to 10/20, but I could, and still have plenty enough for the 5/10 game, and I don't think my confidence would be shattered too bad. I just don't know if its the most +EV move for me at this point. I actually started the 5/10 6max b/c I was told that its good experience to have before moving up to Party 15/30. After playing a little while though I really like the game, and if I can succeed at the 10/20 level then I might stay there for some time, or even make it my permanent game if I find the pool of poor players to be plentiful enough.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
My SD at 10/20 (15.3/100) is lower then at 5/10 (15.8/100). My winrate at 5/10 was 3BB/100, at 10/20 2.5BB/100. But since rake is almost half (in BB) at 10/20 I actually is winning 1BB less.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm confused. If the rake is lower, arent you winning more, not less??

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My SD at 10/20 (15.3/100) is lower then at 5/10 (15.8/100). My winrate at 5/10 was 3BB/100, at 10/20 2.5BB/100. But since rake is almost half (in BB) at 10/20 I actually is winning 1BB less.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm confused. If the rake is lower, arent you winning more, not less??

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he means that even though he's actually made only .5 BB/100 less, if the rake were the same % at both levels he's be making 1BB / 100 less at 10/20... or like if there were no rake in either game he'd be making 1 BB/100 more at 5/10 than 10/20.

[Alobar]

ahhh, I see...thanks

[kiddo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont understand why SD is lower, maybe I have become a better player

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't understand this, as usually very good players are more aggressive, and have higher SD's than medium/good players. Of course if you're better then you'll have much less losing sessions/days, but thats b/c your expected win is much higher, not b/c your SD is actually lower (or at least I thought)

[/ QUOTE ]

I read math at the university, but it was only for 6 months and 14 years ago so I am not sure I am the one to talk about this /images/graemlins/smile.gif but I dont think standard deviation (SD) and winrate are correlated. Your bankroll is decided by 2 factors, your winrate and your SD.

SD is a meassure of how much you, with your playing style, can lose againt this typical lineup in a given amount of time (normally meassured in /100 hands). (If your SD is 15/100 hands you can say that 68.2% of the times your win will be +-SD, that is, 68.2% you will win or lose less then 15BB if u play 100 hands. 99.7% u will be within +-3SD)

If you are loose and aggressive your SD will go up a lot, u can expect to win or lose much more in 100 hands, u play more hands and u play them more aggressive. If u are tight and passive your SD will be lower, you play less hands and you u dont put so many bets into the pot.

But if u are tight aggressive? Being tight makes your SD go down, being aggressive makes it go up.

When u become a better pokerplayer u make fewer misstakes, u read the board better, u understand your outs, you read the other oppononents better etc.

When I said I maybe had become a better player I was thinking that maybe I have become better at being tight when I earlier didnt give up and better at getting aggressive when I earlier didnt had the guts (or the read). If this is true I can have a lower SD against a typical lineup then before. That is, if I go down to 5/10 I will have a lower SD then before and now at 10/20 I can have same SD.

This will, of course, also increase my winrate, so in this case my SD goes down AND my winrate goes up. But if I, for example, started to play extremly tight my SD would go down AND my winrate go down.

Here are my stats from 5/10 and 10/20

5/10 - 10/20

VPIP 21.92 (21.23)
PFR 13.85 (14.31)
A-flop 2.9 (3.05)
A-turn 2.6 (2.69)
A-river 1.55 (1.58)

As u can see my style looks very much the same but this is against a more aggressive lineup.

In my other post I said that players at 10/20 are different, not better. Well, this is true of most players but there are more good players at 10/20. There are a few more as tight as me. And there a bunch of players (VPIP 30-35, PFR 15, A-flop 4, A-turn 4, A-river 3), that I think are not winning much in the long run but if they are more then 2 at same table u suddenly find yourself under fire all the time and that is tricky if u are multitabling.