|
|
#12
02-03-2006, 12:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A Discussion of Variance
[ QUOTE ]
This creates a doubt ... wouldn't it better then to keep at lower levels? And maybe play higher only if someone is ... well ... sharing their money? regards, dardo [/ QUOTE ] No. I only need to win at 1 PTBB/100 at NL $200 to make the same as the guy who wins 8 PTBB/100 at NL $25. 
|
|
#13
02-03-2006, 12:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
Heres the graphs from individual levels. I played 25/50 concurrently and since this is mainly a discussion of when I moved up having anything to do with a downswing, I combined those graphs.
  
|
|
#14
02-03-2006, 12:16 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
notice how the higher you are playing the sharper the downswing. why don't you make a post of the last 10 hands or whatever where you got stacked at all three levels.
|
|
#16
02-03-2006, 12:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
[ QUOTE ]
At 200 NL it seems you can make a very good profit and don't risk a 20K breakeven ... hmm? [/ QUOTE ] I think the risk is still there, but is much less so than at NL $400 or NL$1000 so I think I agree with your comment.
|
|
#17
02-03-2006, 12:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
mosuavea -
Please don't take this the wrong way. The graphs you posted of your 200NL and 100NL games remind me of the many graphs I've seen before of players who are outclassed by thier opponents. I'm not saying you're bad at poker. I don't know your game - and honestly, who am I to judge? But I would like for you to consider the possibility that your results at the higher levels were due in part to misplayed hands.
|
|
#18
02-03-2006, 12:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
At the 25/50 NL graph, at the end, there is a period from 56-76K that is practically breakeven. I tend to think from what I've read around that this is too much, being that lower limits. Of course, I maybe wrong for whatever reson ( the graphs, results, etc ...). regards, dardo
|
|
#19
02-03-2006, 12:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
[ QUOTE ]
mosuavea - Please don't take this the wrong way. The graphs you posted of your 200NL and 100NL games remind me of the many graphs I've seen before of players who are outclassed by thier opponents. I'm not saying you're bad at poker. I don't know your game - and honestly, who am I to judge? But I would like for you to consider the possibility that your results at the higher levels were due in part to misplayed hands. [/ QUOTE ] His win rate looks like 2.2PTBB for the $100's and over 3 for the $200's so with this small a sample it is hard to say he is outclassed. Maybe he is taking longer to adjust than some or has leaks in his game, but as long as he is an overall winner, I wouldn't say he is outclassed.
|
|
#20
02-03-2006, 12:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Discussion of Variance
[ QUOTE ]
mosuavea - Please don't take this the wrong way. The graphs you posted of your 200NL and 100NL games remind me of the many graphs I've seen before of players who are outclassed by thier opponents. I'm not saying you're bad at poker. I don't know your game - and honestly, who am I to judge? But I would like for you to consider the possibility that your results at the higher levels were due in part to misplayed hands. [/ QUOTE ] No offense taken, you are just looking at graphs so thats all there is to base your decsion on. I knew I would take heat posting something like this.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
