Does Multi-tabling increase variance?

[bonanz]

your example really makes no sense.

you said initially your variance will decrease over time by multitabling.

your variance will stay the same if you are using # of hands as your guideline. if i play 1000 hands in one hour or take a week to play 1000 hands my variance will remain the same.

if you are using amount of time as your guideline your variance will increase per unit of time since you are squeezing in way more hands per unit of time. so if I play 1000 hands in an hour then play 1000 hands over the course of a week, my hourly variance would be higher during my one hour session.

[axioma]

"so if I play 1000 hands in an hour then play 1000 hands over the course of a week, my hourly variance would be higher during my one hour session."

Well no [censored]. Of course, that comment is completly irrelevant.

The fact remains: if you play 200 hands in an hour the variance in your EV is less for that hours play than if you instead only played 50 hands in that hour.

I thought this was basic stuff...

[bonanz]

you:
[ QUOTE ]
obviously, the more hands you play in a given time unit, the lower your variance will be.


[/ QUOTE ]
me:

[ QUOTE ]
" if I play 1000 hands in an hour then play 1000 hands over the course of a week, my hourly variance would be higher during my one hour session."


[/ QUOTE ]

you:
[ QUOTE ]
Well no [censored]. The fact remains: if you play 200 hands in an hour the variance in your EV is less for that hours play than if you instead only played 50 hands in that hour.


[/ QUOTE ]

am i going crazy? your statement is the exact opposite of mine yet you still maintain that both are correct? I mean seriously someone correct me if i'm wrong in this point alone.


[ QUOTE ]
I thought this was basic stuff...

[/ QUOTE ]

[axioma]

Perhaps i should have extended that first quote you used of mine to read: "obviously, the more hands you play in a given time unit, the lower your variance (in EV for the time unit) will be for that time unit than if you played fewer hands for the same period of time."

I (wrongly) thought that people here would pick up what I was saying with little difficulty.

The next quote of yours is completely besides the point so I wont comment.

I re-state by orignal point in your third quote of mine trying to be as clear as possible.

Your point is not the opposite of mine, in the same way that 'I like cheese' is not the opposite of 'I hate arguing with people on the internet'.

anyway Ill leave this alone now. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[bonanz]

to quote GOT "you're wrong. I'm right. Not close"
however you are correct about arguing over the net.

link

[axioma]

After reading that thread im sure now we are arguing different points. Its the only possible reason for the lack of comprehension between us, unless of course one of us is mentally unstable, and the Dr. says im O.K.

One final comment and then im going to bed.

The whole 'time' issue might be whats confusing you. I only mentioned it because its clear that when multi-tabling you play more hands in an hour than at a single table.

Its the number of hands thats important here.

again, say you average 3BB/100 over 1M hands. if you somehow manage to play 1M hands in an hour (of course assuming constant skill level) your BB/100 for that session will be very close to 3 right? Closer to 3 than it would be if you only played 50 hands.

Please at least agree with that [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img].

Now I really am going to bed.

[bonanz]

this is the last i will post.

you are misunderstanding variance. if you play 1 million hands in one hour your variance will be higher than if you played 50 hands in one hour.

if you multitable, or play 1 million hands in one hour your winrate will approach your true winrate much more quickly. that is not decreasing variance.

take some time to think about it

[mmbt0ne]

I would jump in, but I think I explained it fine the first time, and bonanz did an great job of trying to get it through. You can't add variances (whether in terms of BB/100 or BB/hr) and come up with a variance less than any of the originals. It is statistically impossible. And there's a lot of crazy stuff you can do with statistics, so that's saying something.

[wdbaker]

you will just get where you are going faster, if you are a +EV player you will tend to have more winning sessions, if -EV player you will tend to have more losing sessions. It's still the same variance, just happens over a shorter time span.

Example with one table 30 hrs +EV player 1/2 limit = $60
Example with 3 tables 10 hrs +EV: tbl1 -$30, tbl2 $70, tbl3 -10 = $60 same as above only faster

One Street at a Time
wdbaker Denver, Co

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
if you multitable, or play 1 million hands in one hour your winrate will approach your true winrate much more quickly. that is not decreasing variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. It sounds like he is confusing variance with standard error, which does go down.

gm