In depth Analysis of Variance of Poker...

[Paxinor]

i don't know if i get your point (english is not my mother tongue)

is the effect you are describing explained by my results of 5 PTBB winningplayer who has quite frequently a 15+ downswing but very unfrequently a 20+ downswing, compared to the ratio 10+ downswing to 15+ downswing?

im just saying that if you try to simulate downswings with samples of 100 pokerhands and assume normal distribution you will get quite different results, as when you do with the original distribution (for the same player). because an all in happens quite frequently compared to lower losses..

even ruling out the problem that you won't catch the things that happen within the 100 pokerhands.

there has been such an simulation in an earlier thread, and there were critics about its results. i'd have to do my own calculations to show the exact difference.

of course that simulation will not create a completly silly result and my result doesn't really resembles pokerreality.

but all the calculations before have been made with samples of 100 pokerhands assuming normal distribution. this will affect confidenceintervalls and also kelly bankrolls (which would be the next step)

im using a kelly bankroll (im relativly tiltfree and don't have problems with stepping down and so on...) and i calculated the limitchangingpoints with standard deviation from PT. im assuming there will be some miscalculations because of my results right here but i have to look further into that anyways

again thank you very much for the input, its good and very interesting to have a discussion like this.