Varience differnce in Full Ring vs SH, NL vs Limit

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #1 01-07-2005, 08:31 PM

i dont have huge sample sizes, but this is interesting:

A friends stats:

37k hands at full ring 5/10 = SD of 14.3BB/100

88k hands at SH 5/10 = SD of 15.5BB/100

my stats at NL:

84k hands at 100NL Full Ring (2$ Bblind) = SD of 33.4BB/100 (133$/100)

17k hands at 100NL SH (2$ Bblind) = SD of 25.4BB/100 (102$/100)

How can this be? Are my sample sizes too small? Does WR play a large roll in this?

You math guys please tell me what is going on here.

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #2 01-07-2005, 09:00 PM

sklansky, malmuth..... where you at brothas???

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #3 01-07-2005, 09:01 PM

Miller??? anyone?

SomethingClever · #4 01-08-2005, 07:54 PM

Um. 2+2=4.

POWN

gaming_mouse · #5 01-08-2005, 08:08 PM

I think it's possible, though somewhat unlikely, that the discrepancy is due to your sample size.

It's more likely due to differences between your playings style and your friends. Is he hyper-aggressive short handed?

Also, it seems that your results are more in line with what we should expect, based on the article in the other thread.

gm

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #6 01-08-2005, 08:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's possible, though somewhat unlikely, that the discrepancy is due to your sample size.

It's more likely due to differences between your playings style and your friends. Is he hyper-aggressive short handed?

Also, it seems that your results are more in line with what we should expect, based on the article in the other thread.

gm

[/ QUOTE ]

We are both hyper-aggro. I think that this trend is because the players in NL 6max make way more mistakes in big bet situations, thus i push a bigger edge more often than in a limit game. This is just my hypothesis, and i am very curious as to what is actually happening here.

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #7 01-08-2005, 08:14 PM

PS. i dont think its my sample size. My SD has not moved more than 1/2 a BB in the last 15k hands or so.

gaming_mouse · #8 01-08-2005, 08:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
PS. i dont think its my sample size. My SD has not moved more than 1/2 a BB in the last 15k hands or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I didn't think it was either.

Also, the article about how SH-variance is usually smaller was for limit games. It may, or may not, carry over to no limit. However, your friend's stats seem to be an anomaly, though hyper-aggressive play helps exlain them.

As for what you're seeing in the NL games, I think your explanation is as good as any I can think of. But who know for sure? It's a complex beast to understand. But whatever the reasons are, your sample size is big enough to trust your stats pretty well, as you said.

PS: Who is your avatar a picture of?

Piz0wn0reD!!!!!! · #9 01-08-2005, 08:49 PM

I was always under the impperesion that limit SH did have higher varience than its full ring counterpart.

my avatar is just some little girl on the internet that i jokingly claim i would have sex with. Prolly too poor taste for 1/2 of 2+2. ill change it soon.

gaming_mouse · #10 01-08-2005, 10:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was always under the impperesion that limit SH did have higher varience than its full ring counterpart.

[/ QUOTE ]

We had this discussion already, but I'm still convinced that impression is wrong.

[ QUOTE ]
my avatar is just some little girl on the internet that i jokingly claim i would have sex with. Prolly too poor taste for 1/2 of 2+2. ill change it soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nonesense. Play to the elite among your audience, not the rabble.