Looking for some intermediate advice

[lstream]

[ QUOTE ]
But the past week has been a nightmare

[/ QUOTE ]
A week is a minor blip in the radar in this game. As others have said, be prepared for stretches of months where nothing seems to go right. Yes you will lose lots of money to "inferior" players who are doing downright stupid things. Thats what keeps them coming back. Running bad is like a big filter that separates poker tourists from the long term winning players.

Heh LOL ... my experience exactly .... a great run lasting one day, now weeks of losing it again

I hate the variance bit of poker, but if it wasn't there, we might as well play chess, and when the best wins everytime, nobody wants to play, so ...

The interesting question is, Stud or Hold'em ??

Why play stud at all ... especially since it's harder to multitable stud ?? (and is multitabling overrated by the way)

[frappeboy]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate the variance bit of poker, but if it wasn't there, we might as well play chess

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a certain degree of luck in chess. Like getting paired with an opponent who got roaring drunk the night before. Sometimes certain players match up better against others, and sometimes you just happen to make the right moves by accident (this happens to me ALOT and I'm quite strong)... Anyways I don't know what the point of this post is, I guess it's "Variance sucks and then you die".

Being unclear I will reformulate, what I just wrote

The we might just as well play chess remark is to be seen in this light:

In chess there is some, but far less variance than in poker, so if there is the slightest difference in strength between to players, it quickly show and the worse player gets spanked (you do not need a sample of 10000 games, a mere 10 games might suffice as a significant sample .. a 100 games is more than enough)

As a consequence of this, there is zero money to be won in the world of chess if you are not a worldclass player. (That is the price for not having big variance, no money)


But the question of this post is, have to minimize variance ??

Originally it came as an, How to minimize variance in stud ... but I more wonder, which game to play to minimize Variance Hold'em or Stud ?? (And yes there is the good old stud8 answer to this as well, which brings us to the next question. Most tend to agree that hi/lo games are harder on Fish, do they move on quickly and just leave the regulars or ?? (I haven't played that much stud8 as you know, but am considering giving the 2/4$ games on party a shot)

[frappeboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Originally it came as an, How to minimize variance in stud ... but I more wonder, which game to play to minimize Variance Hold'em or Stud ?? (And yes there is the good old stud8 answer to this as well, which brings us to the next question. Most tend to agree that hi/lo games are harder on Fish, do they move on quickly and just leave the regulars or ?? (I haven't played that much stud8 as you know, but am considering giving the 2/4$ games on party a shot)

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I think I can answer this question. Omaha 8/b and Stud 8/b have the lowest variance of limit games. I also think that limit hold'em has less variance than stud unless the game is really aggressive with lots of bets going into the pot preflop, in which case it has about the same variance as stud.

The game that has the least variance of all is NL hold'em, simply because you can control the odds you give your opponent and charge a weak player huge amounts when hes on a draw, this increase your win rate by a huge margin and the larger your win rate the smaller your variance.

You can control, to some degree, how much variance you have when playing stud. You do this by folding in marginal situations. You may lose a little bit off your win rate by playing this way, but your standard deviation will be much lower. But if you're the type of player who will go on major tilt when losing, than you actually SAVE money in the long run even though you lose money right now. This is because you'll have less swings and therefore go on tilt LESS. Also, if you have any doubts about how well you can play in marginal situations, you will save money by playing this way.

[Andy B]

When I was a student at Boston U (1986-90), there was a guy who played chess in front of the Au Bon Pain on Harvard Square and took on all comers for $2 a game. You got ten minutes and he got five. Someone who was accomplished might get five minutes to his four. I believe that this was his only means of support. Of course, this might be worse than no money, because he might have been better off making sandwiches in the Au Bon Pain.

[Roland]

[ QUOTE ]
Like getting paired with an opponent who got roaring drunk the night before.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know Andy plays chess.

[ QUOTE ]
sometimes you just happen to make the right moves by accident (this happens to me ALOT and I'm quite strong)...

[/ QUOTE ]

You run g00d.

[ QUOTE ]
"Variance sucks and then you die".

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to die.

[Andy B]

I don't remember the last time I actually played chess. It's probably been a few years. I played a fair amount in high school and college, studied the game some. I do very well against uninitiated players--my mom, my ex-father-in-law, etc., but good players mop the floor with me.

Also, "roaring drunk" is BeerMoney's domain. I drink a certain amount, but I don't overdo it very often. I'm 37, and when I do have too many, the next morning is moderately hellish. Also, taxis are ridiculously expensive in this town.