+EV versus Variance

[Finite_Risk]

I have seen several posts recently along the lines of "I was a slight favorite" or "I was 40% to hit my hand and paid 37% of the pot" so I'll push that edge all day long.

My question is - Does anyone consider the variance you are assuming in doing this?

You don't invest in riskier securities without a higher expected return. I would think about committing a large portion of my roll/stack (yes, vague term) if I am just a slight favorite (52/48, etc) - is it worth the variance or can I wait for a better spot or series of better spots.

People argue that this edge makes casinos rich - I believe they are missing the fact that the casino has more individual outcomes in a day than most people have in a lifetime - the law of large numbers truly in their favor.

For most of us, assuming the large variance by pushing SMALL edges probably increases the risk of busting your bankroll more than its worth.

Thoughts?

I think you're right in the sense that the risking of your bankroll (assuming you have no more funds to add to it) is the worst case scenario. And of course, you should do everything you can do to stay out of high variance situations which are by their very nature marginal (slight +EV and high variance). Of course, mathmaticallly speaking, if you have the slightest of edges, in the long run it's profitable. But in the end, it's up to each person's own preference. I personally would rather not put myself in marginal situations that are barely +EV. I hate swings and feel that the toll they take on my psche is greater than the few extra bucks I might be able to squeeze into my roll. For me, the aggravation of swings is not worth the little extra added profit.

It's a personal tolerance level, but I think that you're right that people get too caught up in it. I think part of it is simple machismo. Your example is a perfect illustration of this: "'I was a slight favorite' or 'I was 40% to hit my hand and paid 37% of the pot' so I'll push that edge all day long." It's almost as if some guys feel they'll be less of men by not pushing ever .001 percent advantage they may have, because that's the way real men play poker. But in the end, you make very little from these situations because they are so marginal. And I always find it silly when guys chastize a poster for not pushing their 1% advantage. It's all about personal tolerance, but in the long run, it makes little real impact on your poker results. Not enough to really worry about anyway IMO.

[nWirb]

If you have 200 buy ins at the limit you are playing it's much easier to take that +1% EV then when you have 15-20 buy ins since your ROR is much lower.
For instance only crazy gamblers would take a 55/45 for their entire life savings.
I think it's mostly a question of how big your bankroll is in regard to the limit you are playing.

[Finite_Risk]

lol...wtf is that avatar?

I think its a fat kid trying to play pretend drumb. Very good +EV for laughs.