i have a game buy-in theory question

[deucethree]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The un-capped game the way he's describing it should be very low variance. If people are opening for 20BB's just buy in short, pick up a premium hand, push it, be crushing his range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big wins also increase variance. Anytime you're playing for your stack more often in one game than you are in another, variance goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience the lower the starting stacks compared to the blinds the more often you play for your starting stack. Ever play 1/2 with a $100 max buy in? It's like the final table of an old WPT tourney. AJ = the nuts

Also, I really don't think that statement is true. If you sit in a brad booth game and he open shoves blind for 100BB's and you get to call him for your stack w/ a premium hand you really think a game with repeated situations of that has more variance than a well played game that doesn't necessarily play as big? Your edge has a lot to do with variance too.

I don't know how either of the games OP mentioned play (other than his mention of some very unsound play in the uncapped game). There's nothing theoretical that really supports not stepping into the uncapped game.

[deucethree]

Which has a greater risk of ruin?

a) 1/30 of your bank-roll even money flips w/ a coin that gives you a 75% edge

b) 1/100 of your bank-roll even money flips w/ a coin that gives you a 51% edge

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The un-capped game the way he's describing it should be very low variance. If people are opening for 20BB's just buy in short, pick up a premium hand, push it, be crushing his range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big wins also increase variance. Anytime you're playing for your stack more often in one game than you are in another, variance goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience the lower the starting stacks compared to the blinds the more often you play for your starting stack. Ever play 1/2 with a $100 max buy in? It's like the final table of an old WPT tourney. AJ = the nuts

Also, I really don't think that statement is true. If you sit in a brad booth game and he open shoves blind for 100BB's and you get to call him for your stack w/ a premium hand you really think a game with repeated situations of that has more variance than a well played game that doesn't necessarily play as big? Your edge has a lot to do with variance too.

I don't know how either of the games OP mentioned play (other than his mention of some very unsound play in the uncapped game). There's nothing theoretical that really supports not stepping into the uncapped game.

[/ QUOTE ]

that is trivially true and doesn't really matter. this is an issue of frequency vs. magnitude. you will be shoving more when you are short stacking, but you will be shoving for much more money in the uncapped game if they are playing like maniacs.

assuming your br can handle the swings, if you really believe you have an edge you shouldn't be buying in short. (unless you are extremely risk averse, but then i would say you didn't really have an edge).

[deucethree]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The un-capped game the way he's describing it should be very low variance. If people are opening for 20BB's just buy in short, pick up a premium hand, push it, be crushing his range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big wins also increase variance. Anytime you're playing for your stack more often in one game than you are in another, variance goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience the lower the starting stacks compared to the blinds the more often you play for your starting stack. Ever play 1/2 with a $100 max buy in? It's like the final table of an old WPT tourney. AJ = the nuts

Also, I really don't think that statement is true. If you sit in a brad booth game and he open shoves blind for 100BB's and you get to call him for your stack w/ a premium hand you really think a game with repeated situations of that has more variance than a well played game that doesn't necessarily play as big? Your edge has a lot to do with variance too.

I don't know how either of the games OP mentioned play (other than his mention of some very unsound play in the uncapped game). There's nothing theoretical that really supports not stepping into the uncapped game.

[/ QUOTE ]

that is trivially true and doesn't really matter. this is an issue of frequency vs. magnitude. you will be shoving more when you are short stacking, but you will be shoving for much more money in the uncapped game if they are playing like maniacs.

assuming your br can handle the swings, if you really believe you have an edge you shouldn't be buying in short. (unless you are extremely risk averse, but then i would say you didn't really have an edge).

[/ QUOTE ]

he'd be buying in for the same in either game. his effective stack (at the beginning of the game) would be the same in both. the shoves would be for the same amount.

[Dangeresque]

[ QUOTE ]
Which has a greater risk of ruin?

a) 1/30 of your bank-roll even money flips w/ a coin that gives you a 75% edge

b) 1/100 of your bank-roll even money flips w/ a coin that gives you a 51% edge

[/ QUOTE ]

a)& b) Std. Dev = 1 a) (75-25)/100 EV=0.5 b) 51-49/100 EV=0.02

Calculated at: http://www.poker-tools-online.com/riskofruin.html

a) 0.000000%

b) 1.831564%

But of course, you provide a skewed example.

[ev_slave]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The un-capped game the way he's describing it should be very low variance. If people are opening for 20BB's just buy in short, pick up a premium hand, push it, be crushing his range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big wins also increase variance. Anytime you're playing for your stack more often in one game than you are in another, variance goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

In my experience the lower the starting stacks compared to the blinds the more often you play for your starting stack. Ever play 1/2 with a $100 max buy in? It's like the final table of an old WPT tourney. AJ = the nuts

Also, I really don't think that statement is true. If you sit in a brad booth game and he open shoves blind for 100BB's and you get to call him for your stack w/ a premium hand you really think a game with repeated situations of that has more variance than a well played game that doesn't necessarily play as big? Your edge has a lot to do with variance too.

I don't know how either of the games OP mentioned play (other than his mention of some very unsound play in the uncapped game). There's nothing theoretical that really supports not stepping into the uncapped game.

[/ QUOTE ]

that is trivially true and doesn't really matter. this is an issue of frequency vs. magnitude. you will be shoving more when you are short stacking, but you will be shoving for much more money in the uncapped game if they are playing like maniacs.

assuming your br can handle the swings, if you really believe you have an edge you shouldn't be buying in short. (unless you are extremely risk averse, but then i would say you didn't really have an edge).

[/ QUOTE ]

he'd be buying in for the same in either game. his effective stack (at the beginning of the game) would be the same in both. the shoves would be for the same amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. Except the effective stack would be "smaller" in comparison to other people's stacks in the uncapped game, meaning it gets put in the middle more. Variance goes up. Also, it'll likely get all-in on earlier streets than in an uncapped game. Your edge increases as you see more streets. AA will win over KK something like 4.5:1. So at best your PF equity is ~82%. You can have people putting in money on the turn drawing absolutely dead. That's equity of 100%. So getting your money in on the earlier streets means your edge win putting money in is likely to be smaller. Variance goes up.

[deucethree]

that's being a nit. i forget what he said he's got for a roll but if he's got 30 standard buy ins he should play if it's the better of the 2 games (and games where guys open for 20X the BB tend to be about as juicy as it gets). if he runs cold go to the other one. now, if it's the tougher game, play the other one. if his effective stack gets to the point where he's uncomfortable losing that amount of money, stand up. no way i'm seeing any sound "theory" that should keep him out of that game though. even if it does play with bigger swings that's why you play within your roll and move down if you hit a bad stretch. advising him to stay out of the game where a bunch of bozos are tossing in 20BB's w/ AJ off (which is the type of game he's/you're describing) because you don't like getting it in as a big favorite for your stack is not right.

[ev_slave]

[ QUOTE ]
no way i'm seeing any sound "theory" that should keep him out of that game though.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I said before you started getting all argumentative with the RoR/Variance point:

[ QUOTE ]
However, there is no right answer to this since it is dependent on each person's tolerance of risk.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're correct that this is the only theoretical basis for his consideration and shouldn't necessarily provide an answer. Whether it guides his decision is up to him.

Now if we're going to be discussing theory then don't say things like "if you're a bigger favorite you should play in that one, if not play in the other one." Put that in the beginner's forum.

[facepull]

the capped game is "lighter" of the two games. much of the time there is not a lot of pre-flop raising. but yet the average raise is probably 6-8bbs. the uncapped game has way more money on the table. sometimes it plays like the capped game but often there are some friggen maniacs who buy in for 300-500bb+

[facepull]

im a risk adverse type of player. i prefer smaller profits extended over longer periods of time if that would keep me in action. i turn down high risk small edges to ensure i survive. most of todays players probably hate that and prefer to take these risks to ensure max profit. these two games i see in biloxi seem to be a extension of that.