pokerev, winning pots without showdown [theory]

[BobboFitos]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ive always maintained laggy play is the lower variance ride due to the major concept that pots won w/o showdown escape variance, ie. getting money into the pot which sees a showdown means the hot and cold ness factor predicates 'luck'. take it for what it's worth.

[/ QUOTE ]

OTOH, when playing LAG and running bad could mean that people happen to hold/catch hands they won't surrender to your aggression? Even more variance ?)

[/ QUOTE ]\
no, it means you're losing at a more consistant rate.

the hypothetical i throw out is basically... a nit plays far fewer hands then a lag, GIVEN SAME WIN RATE, if a nit "runs bad" it takes far longer to even this out, given they have far fewer opportunities to capitilize on their expected win rate. ie, if over 1k hands they play 10% (or 100 hands) and "run bad," it will take net 300 hands (or 3k) to "even this streak," vs someone playing 3x the hands typically will have fewer swings.

there is alot more i have to say on this but it's probably wasted.

[tannenj]

[ QUOTE ]
dave,

from my current understanding, there is no reason for the green line to ever go below the red line, in the long run.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think you're wrong. in the long run, i believe the blue line will converge with the red line. the green line is separate; i think you can define the green line as "the blue line plus your results without having seen a showdown."

if you want to look at "running bad," i think you want to compare the blue line to the red line.

quick sidenote: i suspect that the distance of the green line from the red line is strongly correlated to the w$wsf stat.

[_Jager_]

The green line is all the money you lost in non showdown pots, this includes your blinds. I think that the players who get their green line above the blue line, defend their blinds more often and much better than almost everybody.

[RiverFenix]

[ QUOTE ]

there is alot more i have to say on this but it's probably wasted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I'd pay $ for you to add more thoughts on LAG stuff. Is that part of your coaching talking about LAG theory?

[xd40]

its only ~8k hands, but its all i played since i moved up to 50nl. still, from what i read above .. i'm not playing terrible right?

[Jay Riall]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
These graphs are soo [censored] lame, they don't mean jacksh*t. All they are is a very small comfort when running bad imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

WRONG

[/ QUOTE ]

So you think a lot of people can look at these graphs and actually get something useful from them? Something which will help them improve their game/identify leaks?

[Unknown Soldier]

[ QUOTE ]
ive always maintained laggy play is the lower variance ride due to the major concept that pots won w/o showdown escape variance, ie. getting money into the pot which sees a showdown means the hot and cold ness factor predicates 'luck'. take it for what it's worth.

[/ QUOTE ]



the more hands you play, the more variance there is, surely. Look at HU poker. You cant argue that variance HU isn't greater then 6-max. Sure lags win pots w/o going to showdown, but there is still a probability assigned to that event taking place.

[Mr_Pathetic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I expect many SSNLers (myself included) have green lines well below red/blue - Nuggets above is one - and they are commonplace in uNL forum - these indicate postflop could be improved, I think - although it could also be a symptom of limp/call/fit/fold etc. One need to employ the filters to narrow it down [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is definitely incorrect for the reasons mentioned above. Get any strong player to go play a $5 NL table. His green is going to be EXTREMELY close to his blue. Doesn't matter if he's the best postflop player in the world. The vast majority of his hands will end up with a showdown and that means green's going to be close to blue. This is a symptom of the average villain's passivity, not a player's skill or lack thereof.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here is a graph of a Stars .02/.05 NL player. I do not consider myself good at all. In fact I had a -$78 swing in here due to tilt and second best hands. I suspect the green above the blue for the short period of time was me folding out everything to cbets and double barrels. Around hand 15k I started asking myself what better hands fold and what worse hands call and thats when the green and blue came together. The green drop near the end was me getting over aggressive with crap hands against stations (tilt). My won when saw flop over this sample was 40.8.

[NoahSD]

Bobbo, you're ignoring a few important points.

In general, LAGs are making thinner bluffs and value bets, and the thinner something is, the higher variance it is. Also, LAGs play a lot more big pots with close equity.

[Rainclouds]

Playing LAG = more variance than playing TAG, by mathematical definition.

It doesn't matter how you win the pots. The mathematical definition of variance is the sum of the squares of the results of your hands. It's not difficult to see that playing more pots = higher sum.