Re: villain turn c-r/variance
[ QUOTE ]
Well, if you're eliminating all hands other than the ones where you were check raised, your sample size isn't 16K hands. The point I'm getting at is that if you had one of your sample hands where you were pretty deep stacked and had a wickedly cold deck (say top boat vs. quads) and lost a few hundred BBs, this will dramatically skew your results...especially considering the relatively know number of times you've been C/R'd. If this is limit and not NL, this will obviously be different.
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I get your point (on sample issue). I probably obscured my question in OP.
My question here is not the difference in results but the fact I was c-r 2x as much as him; leading me to wonder "is being c-r a function of variance or is it caused (mostly) by other things?"
One could say "variance" in that the hands villains get are a function of variance but how villain plays those hands IMM isn't. Which leads me to believe turn c-r aren't (for the most part) a function of variance. But I'm only guessing; so I posted.
[ QUOTE ]
The aggression factor certain plays a role. If you're ultra aggressive, it's not surprising that you're C/R'd more than he is. Have you done any analysis on how many times you were both checked to, and of those, how many times you both bet?
[/ QUOTE ]
No but that's a good idea..
Mike
|