MONSTER variance (w/ graphs)

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
What is your standard deviation 2 handed, 3 handed, 4 handed, 5-6 handed?

[/ QUOTE ]

uhhhh, if you tell me where I can find those numbers I'll post them.

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of the swings you guys experience are perpetuated by the fact you both play super long sessions and try to "play your way through them," when really, it's just simply tougher to win when you're running bad because opponents pick up on it and attack you and play you more 'correctly.' Cutting sessions short IMO cuts back on the potential likelihood for 1000BB downswings.


[/ QUOTE ]

I've seen you post this point before and I think it's right. I'm very competitive and hate to lose, and sometimes that leads me to chase losses even when the conditions aren't conducive.

I'm curious, though, what you mean by [ QUOTE ]
it's just simply tougher to win when you're running bad because opponents pick up on it and attack you and play you more 'correctly.'

[/ QUOTE ]

If I remember right, you've said before that you will put more pressure on players who are running bad. But for me, at least, when I'm running bad I usually feel like players are trying to run over me (which may just be a function of the fact that everyone's hitting) and I'll be slightly more likely to call down with marginal hands, which would counter increased aggression against me.

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is your standard deviation 2 handed, 3 handed, 4 handed, 5-6 handed?

[/ QUOTE ]

uhhhh, if you tell me where I can find those numbers I'll post them.

[/ QUOTE ]


You can find STD DEV in PT, sessions tab, more detail... I'm guessing you would filter in preferences to get the appropriate information, but not sure if the filter actually applies to that screen as it does not to all of them.

** EDIT ** The method I described does NOT work. It's only your aggregate STD DEV of all hands played and is only filtered by date. Not sure how one would get stats for HU/3h/etc

[Hock_]

[ QUOTE ]
Deep inside I think this is still bothering you! So for you - I'd still say just cheer up!

[/ QUOTE ]

I appreciate the advice, but frankly the +$130k run I've been on the last 3+ weeks has done most of the job in cheering me up. I'd be lying if I said that the downswing didn't shake me a little, but I feel MUCH better now.

[shaundeeb]

[ QUOTE ]
I think a lot of the swings you guys experience are perpetuated by the fact you both play super long sessions and try to "play your way through them," when really, it's just simply tougher to win when you're running bad because opponents pick up on it and attack you and play you more 'correctly.' Cutting sessions short IMO cuts back on the potential likelihood for 1000BB downswings.

Knock on wood but I've yet to experience a downswing over 330BBs, and have only had 2 300BB downswings in my life.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow you just articulated my mentality very well there I play redic short sessions play my best game poss to have fun with you guys and then leave after a bit because you will adjust 10x faster then me.

[Lestat]

This is why I never made it online. I won, but felt it wasn't worth the swings and prolonged flat periods. I have nothing but respect and admiration for you guys who just put your head down and plod your way through these swings.

I think it's because some of you know no different. Maybe you started online and don't know what it's like to play in softer live games where a downswing approaching 200bb's is cause for contemplating suicide.

Yep, that was my problem. I was never able to get used to these swings. I assumed that 300bb downturns and +60k flat streaks meant I must not have an edge (that, or I was being cheated). Nevermind that I won 1000bb's just prior.

In a way, I look to you guys as the pioneers of a new game of poker. Paving the way for others. Many like myself, have not made it, because we were unwilling to enter the uncharted waters of 1000bb downswings. Kind of like Columbus. How long are you willing to keep on sailing before giving up? But you guys have done it and shown it's possible to weather these swings and still do well. My game has certainly improved because of online. Although, I'm still not sure I have the stomach for it.

[Lestat]

[ QUOTE ]
Knock on wood but I've yet to experience a downswing over 330BBs, and have only had 2 300BB downswings in my life.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is impressive, because I'm pretty sure I played with you at the Commerce a few months ago and remember thinking you have a very high variance style.

Don't get me wrong, I was very impressed with your game, but you seem to create bloated pots, which necessitate you making river payoffs that other good players don't have to make. If it was in fact you, I remember some payoffs you made that I thought were really poor until realizing the price you were getting on the river.

I'm not sure what I'm trying to say. Just that it's impressive you haven't had any slides more than 400bb's online. You seem to have a pretty open game so it attests to how well you must play.

[joker122]

"That is impressive, because I'm pretty sure I played with you at the Commerce a few months ago and remember thinking you have a very high variance style.
"

the concept of one style being more high variance than another strikes me as totally bogus. the fact is, your edge in a game determines how much variance you incur. if schneids is doing things like bloating pots but plays that game at a true winrate of 2bb/100, he'll have much less variance than a more conservative and passive player whose true winrate is 1.5bb/100.

[The Funky Llama]

schneids, didn't you have a downswing that was over 500bb when you first moved up to 15/30?

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
"That is impressive, because I'm pretty sure I played with you at the Commerce a few months ago and remember thinking you have a very high variance style.
"

the concept of one style being more high variance than another strikes me as totally bogus. the fact is, your edge in a game determines how much variance you incur. if schneids is doing things like bloating pots but plays that game at a true winrate of 2bb/100, he'll have much less variance than a more conservative and passive player whose true winrate is 1.5bb/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 2bb/100 won't have less variance. He'll have more variance, as you describe his play. But he might not notice it as much in terms of prolonged downswings, etc. since he has more of a cushion to work from.

Different styles of play definitely have different concomitant variance. To conclude otherwise is to fly in the face of both the facts and common sense. Someone who plays 40% of his hands in a 6-max game is going to have more variance than someone who plays 25% of his hands since the variance from folding a hand is zero. By the same token, someone who puts more bets in on average after the flop is going to have more variance than someone who tends to play fit-or-fold (though sometimes players who play passively can have fairly high variance since they tend to put a lot of bets in, just not all at once).