[TNixon]

From your PM to me:

[ QUOTE ]
the next point is that since you're talking about two different games (different blind levels) you have to normalize the variance accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why are we even arguing? You just said exactly what I've been trying to say all along. That you can't use the same calculation to compare a $100 100BB stack vs a $10 BB stack that you can to compare a $100 100BB stack to a $100 10BB stack.

You've been saying the entire time that those two situations are identical, in that the variance is the same in both situations, with the 10BB stack being lower variance than the 100BB stack, *but you're not taking into account the fact that you need to normalize the variance numbers* in your calculations. The way you normalize them is by converting one unit to another, not by just waving your hand and saying "10BB = 10BB, no matter what the big blind actually is"

bb/hand when the BB is $1 is not the same unit of measurement as bb/hand when the BB is $10. You can't just make a direct comparison between numbers expressed in the two units without performing a conversion.

[ QUOTE ]
as such, once you find the std dev in $/hand you should account for how much that money that represents with respect to the table stakes. this means dividing by the size of the big blind

[/ QUOTE ]
If you've got the std deviation in $/hand, why in the world do you want to convert it back to BB/hand?

We want real $ comparisons to make against our bankroll. If you convert it back to BB/hand then you just have to refigure the actual blinds you're playing to figure the *real* impact on your bankroll. We don't care how the variance relates to the table stakes. We care how it relates to our *bankroll*.