Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The OP is currently rolled for at least he $22s, even the $33s if he feels frisky. I'm pretty sure earning potential at the $33s is higher than 2/4, with lower variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having done both, i can tell you that this is incorrect. ($$$ wise)

[/ QUOTE ]

your sample size is too small.

Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are people so negative to Kurosh? I don't get it. The guy has 100/200 experience. I've never seen him be rude or a jerk (maybe I missed the posts) so that separates him from roughly 98% of these forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

He just posts too many sob stories and bad beat posts. His 100-200 experiance comes from running good while way over playing his bankroll. Its not a big supprise that he is nearly broke considering the way he went up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he is fairly honest about his shortcomings. He has also shown himself willing to be able to take his lumps. HE was at one time kind of arrogant sounding... but oh well..If we are going to dislike people for sounding arrogant... might as well start hating 90% of the regular posters at one time or another.

Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are people so negative to Kurosh? I don't get it. The guy has 100/200 experience. I've never seen him be rude or a jerk (maybe I missed the posts) so that separates him from roughly 98% of these forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

He just posts too many sob stories and bad beat posts. His 100-200 experiance comes from running good while way over playing his bankroll. Its not a big supprise that he is nearly broke considering the way he went up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think he is fairly honest about his shortcomings. He has also shown himself willing to be able to take his lumps. HE was at one time kind of arrogant sounding... but oh well..If we are going to dislike people for sounding arrogant... might as well start hating 90% of the regular posters at one time or another.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like kurosh from IRC, and honestly would like to see him turn this around. But to be fair, 90% of the regular posters haven't said they are +EV heads up against anyone.

Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
400 hands -12.40BB/100. At least now I'm more confident I'm running bad and not a losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]


It would appear that in your last 400 hands you are BOTH running bad AND a losing player.


Some of those beats are pretty sucky.
Others are kinda so-so. I mean, we all know that it can be legit to stick around in a heads-up hand with bottom-pair. If you get lucky and catch a runner-runner straight then sobeit.

I had a string like that at the beginning of this month. Down 230BB's in no time.
I am up 370BB's in my 7k hands since then.
It happens.

Re: Assessment
 

this poem rocks.

well done.

Re: SnG = Variance
 

[ QUOTE ]
and we shouldn't be assuming a normal distribution to analyze the math in poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

why not?

Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why are people so negative to Kurosh? I don't get it. The guy has 100/200 experience. I've never seen him be rude or a jerk (maybe I missed the posts) so that separates him from roughly 98% of these forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

He just posts too many sob stories and bad beat posts. His 100-200 experiance comes from running good while way over playing his bankroll. Its not a big supprise that he is nearly broke considering the way he went up.

[/ QUOTE ]You mean the 2 bad beat posts I've posted out of my 2500 posts? One after losing 30k+ in a day and this? Yeah, I post sob stories a lot.

Re: Assessment
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not an expert, but as I understand it, variance in hold em goes something like this:

Multi table tournies >>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>>>>>>>> Limit HE >>> NLHE > SnGs

If this is any way inaccurate someone will (and should) come behind and correct me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course, variance changes depending on your skill, and which games you're better at.

I'm still trying to figure out how I dropped 30 buy-ins at the $11 SNGs but I'm beating 25NL like a drum.

Re: SnG = Variance
 

It is very easy to calculate the SD of SNGs. It is tough to do it for LHE because you need a large sample size, and even then you can have a fairly large sampling error. Obviously LHE hands don't run according to a normal distribution. It is impossible to lose more then 12 BB in a hand while it is quite possible that you can win 20 or more BB in a hand. But when you take hands in blocks of 100, it is possible to get a normal distribution provided that your sample is large enough. You would need hundereds or even more of these blocks to get a reading that is close to corret. I hope you see why you would get such a big error in the SD.

If you take the blocks as hands 1-100, 101-200, 201-300, etc. you will get a much different figure then if you take blocks as hands 51-150, 151-250, 251-350, etc.

So for this reason, I have little to no faith in the PT figure until a ton of hands are logged, and even then there will be some error involved. So when they say that your SD is 16.4546 bb/100, you know that they are FOS. There is no way that you could get a figure that accurate using the method that I provide (and what I hope they use).

Brad

Edit - While SNGs are not low varience (unless you are a bad player), they are certainly less swingy then LHE. I'm currently in about a 50 buy-in downswing right now, and that is over roughly 220 SNGs. I'd be happy to run some numbers on how bad this current downswing is, but I would venture to guess that it is less then a 2 SD swing.

Re: Assessment
 

I'm with you. I don't know why but kurosh is one of the guys I respect most on this forum. I always read a thread that he has made.