my SD dropped?

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
It would also be interesting to investigate why it is lesser or greater. What are the factors that influence variance? How relatively important are they? How do they interact? A model would help make this clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

:nods:

I don't know about anyone else, but I would find such an "article" to be very interesting.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]

This is true if all you want to do is know whether variance is lesser or greater.

It would also be interesting to investigate why it is lesser or greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Fair enough.

[Izverg04]

[ QUOTE ]

I am fairly sure SH games have less variance (not 100% tho). This seems counter-inuitive since you will be playing more.

http://games.cs.ualberta.ca/poker/IRC/mm-sh-var.txt

That article I posted makes a very strong case, backed up with a lot of evidence, for SH having less variance. I'm inclined to believe it barring other (non-anecdotal) evidence to the contrary.


[/ QUOTE ]
Don't put too much value in that article. Just look at the numbers. I don't know what "IRC poker" is, but limit holdem doesn't have SD = 41 BB/100 hands for 10-handed and SD = 26 BB/100 hands for 6-handed play. Those numbers look like they've been taken from play-money VP$IP=100% tables. Only in that context these numbers make sense, since you'll have larger pots at full tables where everyone plays at least preflop.

It is nonsense to claim that short-handed limit hold'em has smaller variance than full-handed. I think anyone who plays both has numbers to back up the oppposite. Your VP$IP goes up quicker as the table gets shorter while the pot size get smaller slowly. This drives up the variance.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
I think anyone who plays both has numbers to back up the oppposite.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then let them post their stats. Until then, all you are doing is guessing the other data is useless.

Plus, your other points have already been discussed.

[Izverg04]

I am not guessing that the data in the article is useless -- that should be clear.

I have only 5k hands of full tables (I play 6-handed), so personally I don't have enough stats.

Would you consider the polled SD numbers referenced in the other post as evidence? They indicate that 6-handed limit HE gives 10-15% larger SD than 10-handed.

[AngryCola]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not guessing that the data in the article is useless -- that should be clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

Honestly, I'm not smart enough to judge this. In these matters, I almost always defer to the likes of gaming mouse and BruceZ.

[Piz0wn0reD!!!!!!]

[ QUOTE ]
It is nonsense to claim that short-handed limit hold'em has smaller variance than full-handed. I think anyone who plays both has numbers to back up the oppposite. Your VP$IP goes up quicker as the table gets shorter while the pot size get smaller slowly. This drives up the variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

ok, this is what i thought. If this is true, how on earth is my SD 1/3 smaller in SH NL? or rather why?

[Izverg04]

Personally, I don't know because I don't play no limit. First of all, this could be a fluctuation. I estimate about 1.5 sigma between your numbers being equal with your samples.

I suppose that in no-limit variance is driven by how often you go all-in, not how often you voluntarily enter the pot. There is some positive correlation between the two for sure, and some negative correlation between the number of players and how often you go all-in. With more players, you find more often another strong hand to go all-in against your strong hand preflop. The same effect is not as important in limit because the pot never gets as big even with 2 strong hands against each other.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
I am not guessing that the data in the article is useless -- that should be clear.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is not clear. It is only clear that it MAY not apply to real money games, and that is something I have already pointed out myself, if you read my other posts in this thread.

Moreover, the data that Piz0wn0reD posted in the other thread seems to support the evidence of the article, more or less. His friends limit SH SD is the same as his full ring SD, and that is for a very aggressive player.

So far, no one has posted ANY data that supports the common wisdom that SH games have a higher SD than full ring games. I am not claiming, and never have claimed, that the case for limit SH games having smaller SD has been proved 100% yet.

But until you, or someone else, posts data to the contrary you should not be saying that it's obvious that they have higher variance just because its accepted wisdom.

gm