In the long run...you'll never win!

Sounds pretty dumb to me unless someone has a short BR and busts out due to variance. How can a 50/50 gamble mean that anyone is going to eventually lose otherwise???

[golfboy7]

Your question is answered by your previous statement.

basically this 'theory' lies on the basis that the larger stack can better absorb variance than the smaller stack.

This is also why we, as poker players, play with large bankrolls.

I have built my roll to 3k and keep it there making frequent withdrawls. Yet I'm still playing 2/4.

Reason? Variance. I don't want to bust out.

[Felipe]

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds pretty dumb to me unless someone has a short BR and busts out due to variance. How can a 50/50 gamble mean that anyone is going to eventually lose otherwise???

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you attempt to read the article?

i'd say for sure... but we aren't playing 50% odds. some of us are higher, some of us are lower.... but playing blackjack where you're playing 49.5% odds if you're good, you will eventually lose all your $$$$$$.

it is true though that this is a good reason to have a 300BB bankroll (5/10 loose passive limit).

i set up some excel spreadsheets with 2BB hour win rate and 12BB/hour variability and it's amazing the different graphs you can get over 100 hours. i have it so i hit F9 and it just updates, but the swings can be frightful or occasionally you get a line that goes straight up. but also occasionally you can get a line that goes almost straight down.