|
|
#41
11-18-2005, 09:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
I keep BR small due to family concerns. I play .5/.10 NL 6max on Stars. I make the full $10 buyin, and I look for tables with money on them. I not only don't want to buy short, I don't want to sit with those who do. I am looking to double up, and you just can't do that against folks with 2, 3, 4 dollar stacks. Another nice feature of Stars is that players respect aggression. If I pot bet the flop, I often take the pot right there. Keeps variance down, though I did just roar out of a 3000 hand downswing. I'm at just under 9BB/hr on that game now. [/ QUOTE ] Nobody should be playing this game looking to make money. Move up to 25NL as soon as you can. 
|
|
#42
11-18-2005, 09:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
I don't have the time to put into the game to justify having more than a couple hundred bucks out there. I used to play 25 and 50 on Party when I was single. These days I often go two weeks without playing a hand.
That said, I don't want to waste what table time I have. I want to beat whatever game I'm sitting in. This game provides a nice, steady upward trend, which is fine for me.
|
|
#43
11-18-2005, 10:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] $100 for 20 buyins would be fine if you where going fully stacked into 2c/5c NL (not that ive ever seen that level) Bottom line is, you dont have enough of a roll. Buying in for $5 or 20bb is not enough chips to play properly. For example, your sitting with AcKc. It is raised $1 to you and your on the button. You re-raise to $3 and are called by the original raiser. The flop is Ad 9d 2s. If your opponent has a flush draw, you cant make him make a mistake with a call. If you cant make him make a mistake, you cant win long term. If you where playing nickle/dime, $100 for 20 buy-ins would be a pretty good bankroll at that level. If you want to only risk $100, go to a site with micro limits until your ready to move up. [/ QUOTE ] Your thinking is flawed. Just because on one particular flop his opponent will be getting proper odds to draw to his flush, does not mean we are playing -EV poker. In fact, even if his opponent may be getting nice odds postflop, his preflop mistakes could be so bad that there is no way for him to make it up postflop, even if he totally owns you postflop. That's what you are not realizing, his mistakes are mostly preflop mistakes. Furthermore, you forget to note that villain doesn't always have a nice draw and the flop doesn't always come down so nice for a good draw. You didn't even mention the times hero flops a flush draw with some overs and can profitably shove his money in on the flop. Playing shortstacked is a +EV strategy if you play tight preflop. That's about all there is to it. It's certainly not an optimal strategy but it is the only way I (a limit donkey) can play this evil NL game and make money. [/ QUOTE ] Yes you might be getting +EV preflop if you go in with the better hand. And yes your opponnents may make a mistake by calling you preflop. But after the flop youve lost the ability to make it -EV for people on a draw. Going all in on the above flop for your last $2 as the favorite is +EV for you even though its +EV for the drawer as well. However, you're missing out on all the advantage we apply on this drawer on the next two streets. So you right, you can win long term with this strategy. Just not as much. Good point.
|
|
#44
11-18-2005, 10:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Limit has a much higher variance over the long run, but the short term swings are much greater in NL. [/ QUOTE ] Are you sure? I thought the variance was MUCH higher in Limit altogether.. I've played both and I would say Limit has many more swings. [/ QUOTE ] I think we agree. I beleive that overall variance is higher is limit. However, the short term swings have a greater variance potential with NL (i.e. you can lose[win] a buy-in (100BB) a single hand while it takes longer to lose [win] the same amount in limit.
|
|
#45
11-18-2005, 10:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Limit has a much higher variance over the long run, but the short term swings are much greater in NL. [/ QUOTE ] Are you sure? I thought the variance was MUCH higher in Limit altogether.. I've played both and I would say Limit has many more swings. [/ QUOTE ] I think we agree. I beleive that overall variance is higher is limit. However, the short term swings have a greater variance potential with NL (i.e. you can lose[win] a buy-in (100BB) a single hand while it takes longer to lose [win] the same amount in limit. [/ QUOTE ] Seems to me a variance damper in NL is the ability to protect hands, apply far more pressure to donks than in limit. Avoids those horrible river suckouts (so often).
|
|
#47
11-18-2005, 10:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Limit has a much higher variance over the long run, but the short term swings are much greater in NL. [/ QUOTE ] Are you sure? I thought the variance was MUCH higher in Limit altogether.. I've played both and I would say Limit has many more swings. [/ QUOTE ] I think we agree. I beleive that overall variance is higher is limit. However, the short term swings have a greater variance potential with NL (i.e. you can lose[win] a buy-in (100BB) a single hand while it takes longer to lose [win] the same amount in limit. [/ QUOTE ] Seems to me a variance damper in NL is the ability to protect hands, apply far more pressure to donks than in limit. Avoids those horrible river suckouts (so often). [/ QUOTE ] Over the long run absolutely. Compare NL to limit. Say you get AA and a ragged flop 4 times in an hour. You lose each time to sets, flushes, straights and a ragged two-pair. Each time in limit you maxed out every street and in NL you got all-in with the best hand. Over this one hour period, your variance was higher higher playing NL. Now assume the same thing happens in the next hour, except that this time you win each hand. Theoretically you are back to even (assuming you didn't double up on your double ups in NL), but the amount of the swing was wider in NL. That's all I'm trying to say.
|
|
#48
11-18-2005, 03:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] $100 for 20 buyins would be fine if you where going fully stacked into 2c/5c NL (not that ive ever seen that level) Bottom line is, you dont have enough of a roll. Buying in for $5 or 20bb is not enough chips to play properly. For example, your sitting with AcKc. It is raised $1 to you and your on the button. You re-raise to $3 and are called by the original raiser. The flop is Ad 9d 2s. If your opponent has a flush draw, you cant make him make a mistake with a call. If you cant make him make a mistake, you cant win long term. If you where playing nickle/dime, $100 for 20 buy-ins would be a pretty good bankroll at that level. If you want to only risk $100, go to a site with micro limits until your ready to move up. [/ QUOTE ] Your thinking is flawed. Just because on one particular flop his opponent will be getting proper odds to draw to his flush, does not mean we are playing -EV poker. In fact, even if his opponent may be getting nice odds postflop, his preflop mistakes could be so bad that there is no way for him to make it up postflop, even if he totally owns you postflop. That's what you are not realizing, his mistakes are mostly preflop mistakes. Furthermore, you forget to note that villain doesn't always have a nice draw and the flop doesn't always come down so nice for a good draw. You didn't even mention the times hero flops a flush draw with some overs and can profitably shove his money in on the flop. Playing shortstacked is a +EV strategy if you play tight preflop. That's about all there is to it. It's certainly not an optimal strategy but it is the only way I (a limit donkey) can play this evil NL game and make money. [/ QUOTE ] Yes you might be getting +EV preflop if you go in with the better hand. And yes your opponnents may make a mistake by calling you preflop. But after the flop youve lost the ability to make it -EV for people on a draw. Going all in on the above flop for your last $2 as the favorite is +EV for you even though its +EV for the drawer as well. However, you're missing out on all the advantage we apply on this drawer on the next two streets. So you right, you can win long term with this strategy. Just not as much. Good point. [/ QUOTE ] True, if you look at postflop as a separate decision, then yes they can sometimes draw out profitably. However, realize that the only reason it is profitable is because they financed it with their own preflop call. So the combination of their preflop+postflop play is overall -EV, but the -EV is heavily weighted towards preflop play. I'm pretty sure you understand this though, I'll stop beating the dead horse. Also, anyone wanna email me a chunk of hand histories so I can play this evil game better? zephed56 at gmail dot com
|
|
#49
11-18-2005, 03:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
Also, anyone wanna email me a chunk of hand histories so I can play this evil game better? [/ QUOTE ] I don't think reviewing NL hand histories will help you because you have to understand the texture of the table and villains to be able to understand the play. Why would someone with AK fold to a preflop rasier in one instance but push all-in in another? Reviewing a hand history won't help. You are better off seeing if you can sweat someone who knows what they are doing.
|
|
#50
11-18-2005, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How bad is variance?
[ QUOTE ]
Is the 20x bankroll theory enough?!? I almost had a 20x buyin swing in a day....one the negative direction and one the positive direction. [/ QUOTE ] I thought so for over 300k hands .. Until I dumped 16 buy-ins in a week at the 100's.. 20 has to be the bare minimum, 30 would be safe and wise. edit: wear a helmet.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
