[TNixon]

[ QUOTE ]
If a=b , then player B will experience more variance .

[/ QUOTE ]
Absolutely.

I have not questioned this statement even once.

[ QUOTE ]
If we talk about variance per BB , then clearly A will experience more swings . If we talk about variance per $ , then B will experience more swings .

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you. This is exactly what I've been trying to say all along.

Except that my point is that the only variance we actually care about, if we're trying to answer real questions, and make comparisons, is the $ variance. Variance per BB is simply not a useful measure if you want to compare two different stakes. You have to make some sort of conversion somewhere if you want to be able to compare 0.5/1 and 5/10 with stacks consisting of a different number of big blinds. Otherwise you're comparing feet to inches, without taking into account that they're not the same measurement.

Are you *sure* you agree with omg? I'm saying exactly the same things you seem to be. He has been disagreeing all along, and quite vehemently, I might add.

[ QUOTE ]
you guys can theorize all you want, but i'll give you experience. when i tried shortstacking (20bb) as a learning process for nl (over 50k hands), my SD was 23bb per 100. when i played fullstacked, 100bb, over 300,000 hands, my SD was 38bb per 100. these might be PTBB but the comparison stands nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]
Presumably at the same limit? 100NL in both cases? So you're buying in for $20 short, and $100 fullstacked?

Once again, I have not said even once that a short stack is higher variance than a deep stack *at the same limits*.