reducing variance: the sklansky bux swap

[tommo]

You could just datamine and record hands where members of the group were all in. From an ev standpoint it wouldn't really even matter if your datamining wasn't perfect, since the hands you missed would even out in the end.

As for payment issues you could bind people to the swap by having them pay an entrance fee. That way you are partially compensated if they back out later.

i.e. you could say "you can join our sklansky buck swap group and we'll watch you at x level and below. but you have to pay y where why is a function of the level that you are watching them. y would probably tend to work out to 2 or 3x the buyin I would guess.

if there were a lot of interest in this I might be able to put a site together. It would be fairly difficult though, so I definitely need to know that some people would be interested (and willing to pay).

basically I would allow people to make groups and charge an entrance fee. I would also keep track of anybody who backed out of a payment and not let him join a group again. I could then datamine all members of my site for their all in hands.

pm me if you're interested and we'll talk a bit.

edit: a third party would do the datamining.

[Ghazban]

Once you start talking about taking money to set this stuff up, you're just doing a fancy-pants version of the insurance that has been around forever except in much higher volume.

[DoGGz]

I think about half this thread doesn't understand OP at all. It doesn't change your EV at all.

I actually would love to do this, but there are very few I trust enough for it.

[tommo]

[ QUOTE ]
Once you start talking about taking money to set this stuff up, you're just doing a fancy-pants version of the insurance that has been around forever except in much higher volume.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm only talking about a monthly fee. the fee wouldn't even depend on what level you are playing at. There's no reason it would even cost very much.

but the site would require maintenance in terms of datamining and making sure people are happy with their groups etc. so some sort of fee seems necessary.

[xorbie]

over the short run, bad players are more likely to "run bad" than they are to "run good". i'm fairly sure of this. over the long run it should obviously even out.

[cowpig]

In my experience, playing deep-stacked the equity gains/losses from variance in all-in situations are only a small portion of overall variance. I've had long sessions where I ran quite badly and lost significantly but the EV calc showed that I had run good in all-in situations.

Take, for example, this hand:
150bb stacks.
I have a maniacal image, and raise 4xbb KK from MP. A very aggressive player 3bets to 12xbb from the button, everyone else folds, I call.

Flop is 25bbs, and comes 268 with a flush draw. I lead pot, and villain raises to 75bbs. I call.

Turn is an offsuit 3. I shove, villain calls.

Villain has 45s, and flopped a double-gutter + flush draw. I lost a stack because he flopped a strong draw, and then hit his most deceptive out.

These kinds of hands situations are the ones that most affect variance in deep-stack poker, and not all-in equity, I think.

[mak15]

[ QUOTE ]
over the short run, bad players are more likely to "run bad" than they are to "run good". i'm fairly sure of this. over the long run it should obviously even out.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're just taking equity vs outcome after players are all in. it doesn't matter at all how the players are playing before the money goes in or how good or bad their equity is once the money goes in.

[cowpig]

Today i was -2.5 buyins in equity according to the calc, but I ran at my normal winrate. All-in equity is NOT a major contributor to variance.

[Ansky]

[ QUOTE ]
Today i was -2.5 buyins in equity according to the calc, but I ran at my normal winrate. All-in equity is NOT a major contributor to variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

and THIS is your emprical evidence?

[cowpig]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Today i was -2.5 buyins in equity according to the calc, but I ran at my normal winrate. All-in equity is NOT a major contributor to variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

and THIS is your emprical evidence?

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, I stand by my statement