Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

I think you have a few screws loose .

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

Ok, back to square one. Jay_shark, is your answer to the $1000 bankroll question choice B?

Do *you* want to take me up on the bet? Obviously you've disqualified yourself as a judge, even though you're from the math forum, but I would have wanted a chance to see the quality of previous postings before agreeing to you as a judge anyway.

I'll give you the same 2 to 1 odds that I'm offering omg.

If you're willing to put money on it, here's my proposal: We find three or 5 judges that both sides can agree on from the probability forum (I expect people frequenting that forum to be slightly more familiar with this sort of math than a more general math forum), and offer them a cut of the winnings if necessary to get people to actually participate. Each of us takes one side of the "Minimize variance with a $1000 bankroll" question that I already posed, and writes a short summary piece on why we believe our advice to that player is correct. Then give the judges discussion time, and have them vote. Majority wins the bet.

Up for it? Anyone? I reserve the right not to take 20 people up on this, but I'll take the first one or two who are willing.

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you have a few screws loose .

[/ QUOTE ]
And I think both you and omg are missing points that are so mind-numbingly obvious that I have no clue how we're still not understanding each other here.

And I was so sure the "distance per second" bit was going to work, too, because the comparison was so obviously wrong to anybody with any sense at all, but so clearly the same as trying to compare two numbers measured in bb/hand.

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

Tnixon , I actually post most frequently in the probability forum but it's understandable if you don't find me credible .

You may want to ask BruceZ from the probability forum if you need assurance .

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

It doesn't take 2thousand word posts to explain this. It's quite simple actually.

Shorter stacks reduce someone's edge. Everyone should know this. The smaller someone's edge is, the higher the variance.

This is true in bankroll situations. If I have a small edge (1ptbb/100), I am more likely to have big bankroll swings aka high variance.

How do shortstacks effect variance? Quite simple again.

If I am playing a donk 20bb deep, let's assume I will win 60% of the time. However, if we are 1000bb deep, I will win much closer to 100% of the time, reducing variance.

Now, this "variance" is not measured in big blinds. It is measured in buy ins. In a husng, stacks start at 75bb= more luck and higher variance.

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

type wars

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

This whole flame war *has* to be the most verbose in 2p2 history? amirite???

Yugoslav

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

[ QUOTE ]
This whole flame war *has* to be the most verbose in 2p2 history? amirite???

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

qft

tnixon- i would suggest that you try to condense each series of 5 posts into one post. this thread is so tl;dr its insane.

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

tbh it would make more sense for 100BB+ HUCASH to be lower variance than a sng with the buyin equal to 100BB in the cash game.

you have 75BBs to work with and it decreases as time goes by.

If you forget about rake, playing a $100 + 0 HUSNG (1500 chips) would be equivalent to playing $100HU with a BB of $1.33 (=blind of 15/30)then it goes up to $3.33 (blinds of 25/50) and even up to $13.33 (blinds 100/200).

I skipped some blind levels but you get the idea. If you play with higher blinds with the same buyin I think your variance will be higher because most of your edge is postflop and you take alot of postflop play out of the game by playing short stakes. So I think you end up getting your money in with a lower edge, therefore higher variance.

So in a sng you are effectively playing that same amount of money with higher blinds. (it being a freezeout may affect the variance, but i'm not sure in what way).

Variance depends on your edge then. Against most opponents your edge will be higher the deeper you are. (an exception is if your opponent folds way way too much when effective stacks are short)

So that leads me to believe that HUCASH has lower variance in terms of $swings in your BR.

That said there are some things that will add more variance to HUCASH games.
[*]playing with 200BB+ stacks.

Sometimes you can get pretty deepstacked in HUCASH and that is going to add a TON to your variance.
[*]playing a good opponent for long periods of time

This is usually a good thing to avoid, but if you do it your variance will skyrocket.


So I think if you play HUCASH and refuse to play effective stacks greater than 100BBs your variance will be lower than a HUSNG player.

But I think most of the posters here that play HUCASH don't shy away from playing the 200BB and 300BB stacks that might develope. That is why I think their variance is higher and why it seems that way to use at the HU forum.


Feel free to disagree with me and point out flawed thinking with explainations. I'm not going to be sticking my ego into this debate, but I will offer my thoughts.

Re: A plea to omgwtfnoway (re the variance thread blowup)
 

none of these formulas take into account the variance of variance. we've all seen people go absolutely crazy esp in heads up.

in a sit n go, you play other people. if you tilt, then your variance will increase. if they tilt, well you might see them again, you might not

cash games are different because your variance will increase if you tilt and if you tilt other people. a lot of players think lags have higher stand dev because they are hitting every edge and this is partly true. what's also true is that people get annoyed and do stupid stuff v lags and that too accounts for more variance