[ShaneP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The very nature of what variance "IS", is fractal. This makes every process both of the transparent and non transparent kind also fractal.


[/ QUOTE ]

variance is due to randomness, fractals are not randomly generated

[/ QUOTE ]

actually fractals can be randomly determined, or deterministic. In some sense, I think the OP could be close to correct, though his thinking may be off a bit. The returns from a stock market can be approximated by fractals (once you remove the base 12% or so expected annual return), and I would think poker winnings would look fairly close to stock returns. I know most Sharkscope graphs look similar.

Though to be honest, I have no idea what that metaphysical BS is in the grandparent. Nor do I think applying a fractal process to the modeling of poker returns gives significantly better results than an approximation by a normal distribution. In the stock market example, the biggest difference in the two approximations is that the tails of the distribution of stock returns is slightly larger than expected from a normal distribution. But those are low probability events, and at least the downward swing of the negative outliers would probably be interrupted by a player stopping for the day or some other external factor.

Shane

[/ QUOTE ]

The outliers in the "tails" of markets bell curves are either unforeseen events and or manipulation.

The tails on a bell curve for poker hands and distributions is random of course are normal because all that is being measured is the fixed static odds of the cards playing out randomly.Since starting cards only matter to a small degree, naturally most of poker is fractal, thus, most variance is fractal.

P.S Whats with this comment here ---> "I have no idea what that metaphysical BS is in the grandparent."

What is this supposed to mean? Clarify please?

Maybe you and Tom are board pals?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually everything is an unforeseen event in the return of stocks. If you want to say otherwise, either you're wrong, or I want you to PM me which stocks are going to increase in value tomorrow. I'll be happy either way.

The 'metaphysical BS' is just because it has seemed like you're throwing around a few words, but not actually applying them to anything, or maybe even knowing what they mean. What is the process that generates the returns, and what does it look like mathematically? If you're talking about looking at the return of KK versus AA (or any other hand), then I don't think there's anything fractal in there at all. The Law of Large Numbers says that in the long run, the actual probability of a win will approach the theoretical probability. So the graph will have lots of fluctuation on the smaller scales, but none on the larger scales.

Eh, just saw Gonzo's response to you. I'll heed his warning.

But I do enjoy being accused of being 'board pals' with someone when an irrational poster has a couple of people disagree with him. Hilarious stuff.

Bye