|
|
#21
06-04-2007, 09:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
actually I'm not sure now, I think your SD would double which should mean your variance would increase by a factor of 4.
|
|
#22
06-04-2007, 10:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
actually I'm not sure now, I think your SD would double which should mean your variance would increase by a factor of 4. [/ QUOTE ] What you meant to say is that the variance would go up by a factor of 4 and therefore, your standard deviation would be up by a factor of 2.
|
|
#24
06-04-2007, 11:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
but if your expectation is significantly higher on a per-hand basis, doesn't that also significantly reduce variance? God poker is hard work. [/ QUOTE ] Actually as your mean (average) expectation goes up, then your variance (and standard deviation) of your expectation goes up too. But what we really should be talking about is the ratio of mean winrate (expectation) divided by standard deviation (variance)..because the absolute numbers are sort of meaningless. Why meaningless? Anyone would much rather have a 20 bb/100 hand winrate with a stdev of 60 compared to 3 bb/100 win rate and a 6 stdev. This metric (mean/stdev) is discussed in 'The Mathematics of Poker' pg 310 and is apparently called The Sharpe Ratio in finance. From a practical sense, the real difficult thing (for me at least) is wanting to play in a juicy game where you believe you will have a big expectation but the game has a large variance too but you don't have the correct bankroll.
|
|
#26
06-04-2007, 02:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
From a practical sense, the real difficult thing (for me at least) is wanting to play in a juicy game where you believe you will have a big expectation but the game has a large variance too but you don't have the correct bankroll. [/ QUOTE ] Yup.
|
|
#27
06-04-2007, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
actually I'm not sure now, I think your SD would double which should mean your variance would increase by a factor of 4. [/ QUOTE ] This debate is so stupid. In common parlance, "variance" is clearly shorthand for "standard deviation."
|
|
#28
06-04-2007, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] actually I'm not sure now, I think your SD would double which should mean your variance would increase by a factor of 4. [/ QUOTE ] This debate is so stupid. In common parlance, "variance" is clearly shorthand for "standard deviation." [/ QUOTE ] Maybe for "feel" players....
|
|
#30
06-05-2007, 03:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: PLO in Vegas during the WSOP---Please keep here
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] actually I'm not sure now, I think your SD would double which should mean your variance would increase by a factor of 4. [/ QUOTE ] This debate is so stupid. In common parlance, "variance" is clearly shorthand for "standard deviation." [/ QUOTE ] not really, for 90% of poker players variance is what causes them to lose, the other 10% have a good idea of the mathematical definition.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
