|
|
#11
12-09-2005, 06:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Variance in different forms of poker
[ QUOTE ]
to answer your question about what has more/less variance, it has to do mainly with the number of cards being delt [/ QUOTE ] Then a game like O8 would have ridiculous variance, when in fact it actually has far less than hold em. You only need 1/2 the bankroll for the same stakes (according to the man who posted above me). 
|
|
#13
12-09-2005, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I resemble that remark
RESENT - I meant RESENT [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ] [And] NL is almost certainly less variance for the winrate than limit. [/ QUOTE ] This is not correct. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] * N-L almost certainly has a smaller C.V. than limit for games with equal blinds but this is due to the huge win rates a good player is capable of attaining. The greatest 10-20 limit holdem player of all time will have a WR that will be dwarfed by that of the greatest (or even a good) 5-10 blind N-L player. The [much] higher WR of the N-L player will serve to [over]compensate for the higher varience this same player faces. However (nonetheless and notwithstanding [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]) if two players have equal WRs - one at 10-20 limit, the other at 5-10 blind N-L - the varience of the limit player will be much smaller than that of the N-L player. - The limit player's varience will be much lower REGARDLESS of their win rates, however the N-L player can lower his varience by a significant amount (while only lowering his WR slightly) by avoiding "coin-flips" (AK vs QQ, etc.); the limit player can also stay out of marginally favorable situations but he pays a higher price for doing so (in terms of lowering his WR) than does the N-L player.
|
|
#14
12-09-2005, 09:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I resemble that remark
[ QUOTE ]
N-L almost certainly has a smaller C.V. than limit for games with equal blinds but this is due to the huge win rates a good player is capable of attaining. [/ QUOTE ] See, this assumption is the problem. If comparing limit to NL is like comparing apples to oranges, then comparing them at the same blind structure makes it even more ridiculous. The stakes of a 2-5 NL game are huge compared to the stakes of a 3-6 limit game. Blind structure isn't a good way to "match" the two.
|
|
#15
12-09-2005, 09:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Variance in different forms of poker
[ QUOTE ]
has 5 card draw ever been played 8 handed? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] Naaaah. Usually two players are lobbying, and one guy is waiting for the deal to pass so he can get a hand.
|
|
#16
12-09-2005, 10:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Variance in different forms of poker
[ QUOTE ]
A 10-20 limit player who wins at a rate of $40 per 100 hands (or an equivelent hourly rate if you prefer to measure in this manner) will see smaller and fewer swings than will someone who wins the same amount at 5-10 blind NL. [/ QUOTE ] Bad comparison. Many players maintain a win rate of 10 PTBB/100 through about NL $200. That's $40/100 hands. The standard deviation associated with NL depends a lot on playing style, but $200/100 hands is reasonable. The player winning the same $40/100 in the $10-$20 limit game should have a SD of about $300/100 hands.
|
|
#17
12-10-2005, 01:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I resemble that remark
I agree, but how else can we compare limit to NL ?
If you have a suggestion I'd love to hear it ? * When I play 2-5 N-L in A.C. the average stack size is often bigger than the average number of chips on an entire table of 3-6 limit.
|
|
#18
12-10-2005, 01:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I resemble that remark
[ QUOTE ]
I agree, but how else can we compare limit to NL ? If you have a suggestion I'd love to hear it ? [/ QUOTE ] By renormalizing results by win rate.
|
|
#19
12-20-2005, 02:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I resemble that remark
No, your post is flat out wrong. The blind size has nothing to do with this.
You need to compare the winrates and equivalize them. Then compare the variance you’ll get in achieving that winrate. See pzhon’s post. -g
|
|
#20
12-20-2005, 03:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: I resemble that remark
The four forms of poker widely discused on 2+2 in order from highest varience to least
1.MTT 2.Limit Holdem 3.NL Holdem 4.STT And nobody in the STT forum will say that STT have the most varience. It has varience just like all forms of poker but by far it has the least.
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
